Canada Case Law

Canada (Attorney General) v. Canadian Civil Liberties Association

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the Federal Court’s core conclusions: the GIC/Cabinet’s Proclamation was unreasonable and ultra vires because the statutory thresholds in the Emergencies Act were not satisfied (no reasonable grounds that threats to the security of Canada existed under CSIS Act s.2 and no national emergency exceeding provincial capacity or not amenable to other laws); the Regulations were overbroad and unjustifiably infringed s.2(b) of the Charter; the Economic Order’s information‑sharing/search regime violated s.8 of the Charter and was not justified under s.1; the…

Source excerpt

• Emergencies act invocation
• Public order emergency
• Reasonableness standard of judicial review
• Standing
• Admissibility of poec evidence (rule 312)
• Freedom of expression s.2(b)

Read case analysis

Conseil scolaire francophone provincial de Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador v. Canada (Canadian Heritage)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court held that Canadian Heritage failed to properly consult the CSF on a minority-language education agreement, granted declaratory relief, and denied damages.

• Official languages act
• Duty to consult
• Section 23 charter
• Accountability mechanisms
• Remedies (declaratory relief, damages)
• Official-languages-act

Read case analysis

Conseil en Éducation des Premières Nations c. Germain

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Court held the CIRB's refusal to reopen was reasonable because the applicant failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence in disclosing the agreement as a new fact; accordingly the application for judicial review was dismissed without addressing the underlying question of jurisdiction.

Source excerpt

• Judicial review
• Standard of review (reasonableness)
• Jurisdiction/competence
• Reconsideration/reopening for new facts
• Diligence in disclosure

Read case analysis

Reference re Constitutional Questions Act (NS) Chignecto Isthmus

Court

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

The Court declined to answer the reference because the Question was vague and lacked sufficient legal content and a concrete legislative scheme, which would require speculation to determine pith and substance and could not yield a precise or useful opinion; additionally, the reference had political undertones suggesting its use for funding and political purposes, rendering an advisory opinion inappropriate.

Source excerpt

• Reference questions
• Division of powers
• Justiciability
• Advisory opinions
• Interprovincial infrastructure
• Unwritten constitutional principles

Read case analysis

Opsis Airport Services Inc. v. Quebec (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court held that Quebec’s Private Security Act is constitutionally inapplicable to airport and marine security activities under interjurisdictional immunity.

• Interjurisdictional immunity
• Aeronautics
• Navigation and shipping
• Private security regulation
• Reading down remedy
• Doctrine of federal paramountcy (considered but not decided)

Read case analysis

Canadian National Railway Company v. British Columbia (Environmental Management Act)

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal upheld provincial spill-preparedness orders against interprovincial railways, finding the law valid, applicable, and not barred by paramountcy.

• Division of powers
• Pith and substance
• Interjurisdictional immunity
• Federal paramountcy
• Spill preparedness and response
• Information disclosure

Read case analysis

Sanis Health Inc. v. British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada upheld s. 11 of British Columbia’s opioid recovery legislation, finding it procedural and within provincial jurisdiction.

• Division of powers
• Extraterritoriality
• Administration of justice
• Class proceedings procedure
• Crown litigation autonomy
• Ancillary powers doctrine

Read case analysis

Sri Lankan Canadian Action Coalition v. Ontario (Attorney General)

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court held the TGEWA is intra vires Ontario because its dominant purpose is to affirm and commemorate the Tamil-Ontarian community's experience and to promote values of human rights, diversity and multiculturalism — a local matter within s. 92(16). The Act is hortatory and symbolic; it does not enact prohibitions or penalties, nor does it restrict expression or create a cognizable adverse distinction against Sinhala-Buddhists. Consequently, the Act does not infringe ss. 2(b) or 15(1) of the Charter. The appeal was dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Division of powers
• Pith and substance
• S. 92(16) local matters power
• Double aspect doctrine
• Education power s.93
• Freedom of expression s.2(b)

Read case analysis

Intelcom Courrier Canada Inc. c. Canada (Le Procureur Général)

Court

Federal Court

La Cour fédérale rejette la requête en injonction interlocutoire d’Intelcom, concluant que le préjudice irréparable n’a pas été démontré selon RJR-MacDonald.

• Interlocutory injunction
• Judicial review
• Jurisdictional classification
• Irreparable harm
• Standard of review
• Interlocutory-injunction

Read case analysis

Sieluzycki v. Coca-Cola Canada Bottling Limited

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The CIRB correctly concluded it lacked jurisdiction because Coca‑Cola’s core business is provincial in nature and the facts and instruments relied upon did not establish that the employer is a federal work, undertaking or business within the meaning of s.2 of the Canada Labour Code; therefore the Registrar’s refusal and the Vice‑Chairperson’s dismissal of reconsideration were lawful.

Source excerpt

• Jurisdiction of labour board
• Federal vs provincial labour regulation
• Duty of fair representation
• Unfair labour practice
• Canada labour code applicability

Read case analysis