Criminal Law Amendment Act, Reference

Criminal Law Amendment Act, Reference

By a majority (Fauteux C.J., Abbott, Judson, Hall and Laskin JJ.) s.120 authorized the Governor in Council to proclaim particular 'provisions' of the Act, including subsections or parts thereof, and the courts cannot substitute their view for the executive on the manner of exercising that discretion; accordingly s.16 was validly brought into force except for the three explicitly omitted subsections. A minority (Martland, Ritchie, Spence and Pigeon JJ.) held the proclamation was invalid because it altered the substantive content of Parliament's provision and no part was brought into force.

Citation
[1970] SCR 777
Parties
Referrer: Governor General in Council; Intervener: Attorney General of Canada; Intervener: Attorney General of Saskatchewan; Intervener: Attorney General of Manitoba; Intervener: Attorney General of Alberta; Intervener: All other interests
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 June 1970
Procedural Posture
Reference (constitutional) / Supreme Court of Canada Hearing on Reference Under S.55 of the Supreme Court Act
Outcome
Split decision. Majority: s.16 validly brought into force except for three specified subsections. Minority: proclamation invalid and no portion brought into force.
Legal Topics
Proclamation Power, Delegation/delegated Legislation, Interpretation of 'provision', Canadian Bill of Rights Implications, Evidentiary Presumptions, Breath Sample/forensic Procedure
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Proclamation Power Delegation/delegated Legislation Interpretation of 'provision' Canadian Bill of Rights Implications +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Governor General in Council

Referrer

Attorney General of Canada

Intervener

Attorney General of Saskatchewan

Intervener

Attorney General of Manitoba

Intervener

Attorney General of Alberta

Intervener

All other interests

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Reference (constitutional) / Supreme Court of Canada Hearing on Reference Under S.55 of the Supreme Court Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.120 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act authorized the Governor in Council to proclaim parts of s.16 while omitting certain subsections
  2. 2 Whether the proclamation that omitted three subsections validly brought s.16 into force
  3. 3 Whether the omission altered substantive rights protected by Parliament or the Canadian Bill of Rights

Ratio Decidendi

By a majority (Fauteux C.J., Abbott, Judson, Hall and Laskin JJ.) s.120 authorized the Governor in Council to proclaim particular 'provisions' of the Act, including subsections or parts thereof, and the courts cannot substitute their view for the executive on the manner of exercising that discretion; accordingly s.16 was validly brought into force except for the three explicitly omitted subsections. A minority (Martland, Ritchie, Spence and Pigeon JJ.) held the proclamation was invalid because it altered the substantive content of Parliament's provision and no part was brought into force.

Court Disposition

Split decision. Majority: s.16 validly brought into force except for three specified subsections. Minority: proclamation invalid and no portion brought into force.

Orders

  • Answer to Question 1: Yes (per Fauteux C.J., Abbott, Judson, Hall and Laskin JJ.); No (per Martland, Ritchie, Spence and Pigeon JJ.)
  • Answer to Question 2: The whole of s.16 with the exception of subsections 16(224A)(1)(c)(i), 16(224A)(1)(f)(iii)(A) and 16(224A)(6)(b) (per majority); No portion of s.16 was brought into effect (per minority)