Click here to return to the
                    POL - 324 Home Page

The Canadian Constitution

  Home || Course Description || Class Schedule || SFU Library Catalogue  || Web Resources

    Course Schedule

Jan 8: Information Session. 

No Readings. 

 

Jan 15: Canada's Constitutional History

Readings: 

For maps of Canada's territorial evolution, visit the National Atlas of Canada.

Key dates in Canada's Constitutional History:

1670 - The Hudson's Bay Company was granted its Charter and rights to 1,486,000 square miles, equalling 38.7% of Canada's land mass today.

1763 - The legal end of warfare between Britain and France

1774 - The Quebec Act - restored the French Civil Code as the basis for private law in Quebec, also protected the rights of Catholics and French language.

1791 - The Constitutional Act, 1791 - divided Quebec into Upper Canada (Ontario) & Lower Canada (Quebec) as separate colonies

1838 - Lord Durham reports on the political troubles in Upper & Lower Canada. He argues that the French should be assimilated and the best way would be to re-united the two provinces.

1840 - The Act of Union, 1840 - combined Upper & Lower Canada into one province of Canada.

1865 - Colonial Laws Validity Act - prevented colonial legislatures from amending or repealing laws passed by the Imperial Parliament; also provided that colonial laws that conflicted with Imperial statutes would be invalid.

1867 - Confederation: Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, & the Province of Canada combine into the Dominion of Canada. The Dominion was created by the British North America Act, 1867 (The BNA Act); this law is now referred to as the Constitution Act, 1867.

1870 - Rupert's Land and North-Western Territory Order - a Royal Order that the lands of the Hudson's' Bay Company be incorporated into the Dominion of Canada.

1923 - Halibut Treaty: The first international treaty negotiated by Canadian representative without British involvement. The Halibut treaty was reached with the United States. The treaty was still signed by the King as Emperor.

1926, 1929, 1930 - Imperial conferences which established the political autonomy of the self-governing Dominions. Included in the agreements was one that the Dominions could chose their own Governors General. The 1926 Imperial Conference resulted in the "Balfour Declaration:"

They [the UK and the dominions] are autonomous communities within the British Empire, equal in status, in no way subordinate to one another in any aspect of their domestic or international affairs, although united by a common allegiance to the Crown, and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations.

The 1930 conference decided that the King would be advised by the relevant Dominion government on the appointment of future Governors General.

1931 - The Statute of Westminster: provided that legislation passed by the Dominion Parliaments could amend or repeal legislation passed by the Imperial Parliament in London. The big exception was the collection of British North America Acts, which could still only be changed (for the most part) by the British. Imperial legislation would only apply to the Dominions if they had consented to it.

1937 - The abdication of Edward VIII

1939 - The King declares war separately for Canada.

1947 - New Letters Patent for the Canadian Governor General

1949 - The Supreme Court of Canada finally becomes the last court of appeal for Canada, replacing the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London.

1982 - The Canada Act, 1982 passed by the British Parliament ends any further British legislative authority over Canada. That Act included the Constitution Act, 1982, which provided the Charter of Rights and a Canadian process for amending the Constitution.

Despite the Canada Act, 1982 having severed British Parliament authority to pass laws with respect to Canada, there are still several colonial remnants left in the Canadian Constitution. In s.55 of the Constitution Act, 1867 the Governor General is authorized to reserve a bill for review by the British government, when it is presented for royal assent by the Governor General; s.57 says that the British govt has up to 2 years to decide of reserved bill should get royal assent. Section 56  requires the Governor General to send copies of all laws passed by the Canadian Parliament to the British government, which has up to 2 years to disallow the legislation.

See the summary chart of Canada's evolution from colonial status

Jan 22: Content of Canada's Constitution

Readings: 

  • Hogg, ch.5 & Appendices I-III

The formal Constitution of Canada is defined in s.52(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982.  The Constitution is comprised of 26 statutes and 10 amendments made since 1982. However, many important elements of the political system are either left completely out of the formal Constitution, or are only incompletely dealt with. The provisions of the Constitutional are often archaic or lack crucial details.

The whole constitution of Canada involves all the rules, customs, and principles relating to the structure and exercise of government power in Canada.  The constitution includes all documents of the formal Constitution, as well as a wide range of other laws, judicial decisions, and informal rules called constitutional conventions.

Examples of important court cases on the constitution include the Supreme Court of Canada's decision on Patriation in 1982 and on Quebec separation in  1998.

Main principles of the Canadian constitution:

  • democracy
  • federalism
  • parliamentary (responsible government)
  • constitutional monarchy
  • rule of law
  • judicial review

Formal Constitution described in s.52: The Canada Act, 1982 plus 24 other statutes and orders-in-council listed in the Schedule  to the Constitution Act, 1982 (30 are listed but 6 of those were mentioned only to be repealed).

52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.

(2) The Constitution of Canada includes

(a) the Canada Act, 1982, including this Act;

(b) the Acts and orders referred to in the Schedule; and

(c) any amendment to any Act or order referred to in paragraph (a) or (b).

(3) Amendments to the Constitution of Canada shall be made only in accordance with the authority contained in the Constitution of Canada.

The two main constitutional documents that define the powers of Canadian governments are:

  • The Constitution Act, 1867. This statute of the British Parliament created Canada in 1867 and set out the division of powers between the federal and provincial governments. Its original name was the British North America Act, 1867, but this was changed in 1982.  The Preamble has interpreted broadly by the courts and included some principles of government that had not been expressly mentioned elsewhere in the Constitution.
  • The Constitution Act, 1982. This Act created for the first time a set of amending procedures for the Constitution to be amended entirely in Canada. Until 1982, many changes to the then British North America Acts had to be carried out by the British Parliament. This Act also includes the Charter of Rights & Freedoms. The Constitution Act, 1982, was actually created as a part of the Canada Act, 1982. The Canada Act ended any further British legislative authority over Canada. 

Powers of the Crown:

  • relating to the legislature
  • relating to foreign affairs
  • relating to natonal defence
  • appointments and honours
  • immunities and privileges
  • emergency prerogative

Canadian governmental authority divided by the Constitution between the federal government and the ten provinces. 

  • Other types of government exist but are created by ordinary legislation and not the Constitution: 
    • the Territories
    • - governments and powers are created by federal legislation
      • Yukon
      • Northwest Territories
      • Nunuvat (came into being April 1, 1999)
    • municipalities - created by provincial legislation
    • aboriginal governments - potential for judicial interpretation of a right to self-government; plus, some aboriginal governments are concluded by treaty, which imply some constitutional protection.

The Constitution Act, 1867 provides a fundamental division of all legislative jurisdiction between the federal and provincial governments.  The original division of powers intended for most of the important areas of public policy to be assigned to the federal government, and mostly local and private matters assigned to the provinces.

Areas of concurrent jurisdiction: agriculture, immigration, and pensions.  Provincial law paramount for pensions, in all others it is federal paramountcy in event of conflicts between federal and provincial laws.

Until mid-20th century, Canada was described by some commentators as "quasi-federal", because of the subordination in the Constitution of provincial legislatures to federal government actors. But each of these factors has changed:

  • federal cabinet has power of 'disallowance' - can veto a provincial law up to a year after it was enacted by the provincial legislature
  • Lieutenant Governors can be bound to act on instructions from Ottawa to exercise power of 'reservation'  - reserving assent pending approval of the bill by federal cabinet - or can reserve a bill on own initiative. 
  • Lieutenant Governors are appointed by the federal government and were considered federal agents in much the same way that early Governors General were considered agents of the British Government.

Three other provisions of the Constitution also contributed to the provinces' legal subordination to federal government:

  • federal 'declaratory power' in s.92(10)(c)
  • federal educational appeals and remedial laws under s.93
  • federal appointment of provincial superior and appeal court judges, under s.96

Canada's originally centralized system of federalism has changed over the years because of: judicial decisions, changes in constitutional conventions, political practice (including federal spending power), and the growth in importance of areas originally assigned to the provinces (i.e. education & health care).

Key judicial rulings on:

  • position of Lt. Governors - Liquidators of Maritime Bank v. Receiver General of New Brunswick [1892] A.C. 437
  • property & civil rights power
  • trade & commerce power
  • treaty-making and implementation
  • Peace, Order & Good Government Clause (POGG) contained in the preamble to s.91 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

 

Jan 29: Legal Research and Judicial Reasoning

Readings: 

  • Hogg, Chapter 15

Class Notes on Legal Research:

The full text of judicial decisions (law reports) can be found in old fashion book & paper form in the SFU Library.  The Reference Department of the Library has prepared several useful documents to help you with your research. 

The Law Reports hand out (and on-line guide) provides information on which law reports are available through the Library. 

The Guide to Legal Research & the Law provides extra help with on-line legal research and information on how to read a case citation.

The Criminology: Resources at SFU and Beyond web page is a useful collection of Internet links and helpful information about resources available in the SFU Library 

A very useful printed index series is available in the Reference Section of the SFU Library (on North side of the main floor), called the Index to Canadian Legal Periodical Literature; it's call number is K9 N39. A annual volume is published indexing articles published in Canada on Canadian legal and constitutional issues. 

The full text of recent decisions of several Canadian courts are available on the Internet. SFU's subscription to LawSource provides online access to the full text of many judicial decisions.

You can also find the full text of the laws of the federal government and several provincial governments on the Internet. 

Doctrines of Judicial interpretation:

  • Key parts of a judicial decision
    • Citation
    • Headnotes
    • Cases & Authorities Referred to
    • Judgment / Opinions
      • unanimous
      • concurring
      • dissenting
    • ratio
    • obiter

    General matters in constitutional interpretation

    • Presumption of Constitutionality
    • Parliamentary sovereignty
    • Progressive Interpretation - the "living tree" doctrine
    • "Quasi-constitutional" status of human rights legislation
    • Primacy Clauses
    • Manner and form restrictions

    Principles used by judges in examining legislation to see whether it has been passed legitimately under the constitution's division of powers between the federal and provincial levels of government:   

    • Exhaustiveness
    • Double Aspect
    • Ancillary Power
    • Paramountcy
    • Interjurisdictional Immunity
    • "Matter" or "Pith and Substance"
      • Purpose
      • Effect
      • Efficacy (not necessary to determine)
    • Singling Out
    • Colourability
    • Prohibition on doing indirectly what one is prohibited form doing directly
    • Legislative History
    • Severance
    • Reading Down
    • Reading In

     


Feb 5: Division of Powers - POGG, Delegation & Criminal Law

Readings: 

  • TBA

Class discussion question:

Using what you've learned last week about judicial reasoning and interpretation of the Constitution, would you classify as intra vires or ultra vires Alberta's Senatorial Selection Act under which elections were held in 1989, 1998 and 2004? 

Delegation

Subordinate / delegated legislation created by an official or body authorized by the legislature to pass laws on a certain subject:

  • most common delegation is to governor in council (cabinet))
  • administrative tribunals
  • professional associations
  • another legislative body
  • an official or institution of another level of government

Legislative & administrative inter-delegation between federal and provincial governments can be problematic from a constitutional perspective.

In Re Gray (1918) 57 SCR 150, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the War Measures Act.  However, it laid down potential barriers to delegation:

  • Abandonment,
  • Abdication, or
  • Surrender of legislative authority

Legislative inter-delegation between federal and provincial governments is problematic. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that one level of government cannot simply delegate its legislative authority to the other. The Nova Scotia Inter-Delegation Case A.-G. N.S. v A.-G.Can. [1951] S.C.R. 31 dealt with a scheme to delegate provincial pension authority to Parliament, but it was struck down. 

However, one level of government can delegate authority to an administrative tribunal created by the other level of government. For example, the federal government has delegated the licensing of inter-provincial carriers to provincial transportation bodies and directed them to apply applicable provincial laws. This was upheld in Coughlin v Ontario Highway Transportation Board [1968] S.C.R. 569

Referential legislation incorporates laws passed by the legislature of another jurisdiction. This device has been upheld by the courts.

The problem of delegatus non potest delegare.

POGG Power - Peace Order and Good Government - is found in the introduction to s.91 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

Three POGG power doctrines developed by the courts:

  • gap
  • national dimensions / concerns
  • emergency

 

Criminal Law

Jurisdiction over criminal matters is divided between the federal and provincial governments by the Constitution Act, 1867:

s.91. Federal legislative powers
27. The Criminal Law, except the Constitution of Courts of Criminal Jurisdiction, but including the Procedure in Criminal Matters.
28. The Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Penitentiaries.

s.92 Provincial legislative powers
6. The Establishment, Maintenance, and Management of Public and Reformatory Prisons in and for the Province.
14. The Administration of Justice in the Province, including the Constitution, Maintenance, and Organization of Provincial Courts, both of Civil and of Criminal Jurisdiction, and including Procedure in Civil Matters in those Courts.
15. The Imposition of Punishment by Fine, Penalty, or Imprisonment for enforcing any Law of the Province made in relation to any Matter coming within any of the Classes of Subjects enumerated in this Section.

An on-going problem for provincial governments arises with the allocation to the federal parliament of jurisdiction over "criminal law" by s.91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867.

Early JCPC rulings covered a range of interpretations of the federal criminal power:

According to Hogg, Viscount Haldane’s 1922 judgment in the Board of Commerce case appeared to limit federal criminal law to what was criminal in 1867.  Haldane said the criminal power is relevant “where the subject matter is one which by its very nature belongs to the domain of criminal jurisprudence.”

In 1931 Lord Atkin greatly broadened scope of criminal law in P.A.T.A. case to the traditional English conception: “The criminal quality of an act cannot be discerned by intuition; nor can it be discovered by reference to any standard but one: Is the act prohibited with penal consequences?”
Proprietary Articles Trade Association v. A.-G. Canada, [1931] A.C. 310 at 324.

This interpretation was replaced by the JCPC in the Margarine Reference in 1951.  The JCPC followed the reasoning of Mr. Justice Rand in the SCC decision on the case. Rand J. stipulated three elements for classifying criminal law in Reference re Validity of s.5(a) of the Dairy Industry Act (Canada), [1949] S.C.R. 1 at 50 (also known as the Margarine Reference:

    • Prohibition of a particular activity (as opposed to pure regulation)
    • Penal consequence
    • Aimed at public purpose “in relation to criminal law”; “Public peace, order, security, health, morality: these are the ordinary though not exclusive ends served by that law…”

In RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (A.G.), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 199, La Forest J said that a wide interpretation shoudl be given to criminal powers. He added that the public purpose in the Margarine test should be framed in terms of “whether the prohibition with penal consequences is directed at an ‘evil’ or injurious effect upon the public.” 

The scope of criminal law has covered a number of ‘undesirable commercial practices’ – SCC upheld Criminal Code provisions on circulating a false prospectus: Smith v. The Queen [1960] SCR 776.

Federal “criminal law” is not restricted to the Criminal Code. Criminal prohibitions are found in a variety of Acts.

Applications of criminal law:

In Biggs v The Queen [1981] 1 SCR 49 the SCC struck down Criminal Code provision creating offence for driving while a driver’s licence is suspended.

Prohibition against tobacco advertising and requirements for tobacco packaging upheld. RJR MacDonald [1995] 2 SCR 199

SCC struck down compulsory ingredients in Federal Food & Drugs Act. Stipulations of what should go into Light Beer were struck down in Labatt Breweries v. A.G. Can. (1979), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 914.

Non-medicinal use of narcotics prohibited by Narcotic Control Act was held to be POGG, not criminal: The Queen v. Hauser, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 984.  This decision has been roundly criticized for failing to situate narcotics in criminal law. It was effectively overturned in R. v. Malmo [2003] 3 SCR 571, which held that laws prohibiting possession of marijuana was based on criminal power, not POGG.

Canadian Environmental Protection Act upheld as criminal in R. v. Hydro Quebec, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 213

 

Feb 12: Spring Break! No classes

 

Feb 19:  Mid-Term Test AND Constitutional Amendment

 

Readings:

  • Hogg, Chapter 4

Just what is the "Constitution of Canada" is defined in s.52 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and the Schedule to that Act.  However, the list of documents in not exhaustive, and some important legal documents are left out (such as the Supreme Court Act and the Letters Patent).

The sections of the Constitution Act, 1982 that lay out the various ways to amend the Constitution are found in Part V. The constitutional amendment processes available are: 

s.38 - agreement of the assemblies of 7 provinces with 50% of the total population - plus Parliament. 

s.41 - the unanimous consent of all provincial assemblies plus Parliament 

s.43 - the consent of Parliament plus one or more provincial assemblies to which an amendment applies if that amendment does not apply to all provinces (except matters which require s.38 or s.41 process) 

s.44 - Parliament may act alone to amend the Constitution of Canada in relation to the executive of Canada or to the House of Commons or Senate (except matters that require either s.38 or s.41) 

s.45 - the legislatures of a province may make laws amending the "constitution of the province" (except matters that require unanimous approval under s.41) 

Since these amending formulas came into effect in 1982, there have been ten formal amendments to the Constitution of Canada: 


The federal parliament passed an Act in early 1996 that changes the way the general "7 & 50" formula works( s.38 of the 1982 Constitution Act). Essentially, the Constitutional Amendments Act instituted a system of regional vetoes.  Statistical analysis of the Regional Veto Formula shows that the new process significantly alters the relative power of the provinces & Parliament to amend the Constitution; furthermore, the ability to block potential amendments dramatically increases while any legislature's ability to successfully initiate an amendment drops greatly. 

The right of Quebec to secede from Canada was dealt with by the Supreme Court of Canada in the Quebec Secession Reference rendered in 1998. The federal government then enacted the Clarity Act in 2000, ostensibly to limit the federal government from negotiating separation unless it had already been approved by a 'clear majority' voting on a 'clear' question in a referendum. In response, the Quebec National Assembly passed An Act respecting the exercise of the fundamental rights and prerogatives of the Québec people and the Québec State.

History of Constitutional Amendments

Prior to 1982, most changes to Canada's formal constitutional documents had to be achieved through legislation by the Imperial Parliament in Britain. An opportunity to provide for domestic amendment to the British North America Acts (and other related imperial statues) arose at the time that the Statute of Westminster was being negotiated. However, agreement could not be reached.

Later attempts to create a domestic amending procedure were debated in the 1960s and 1970s, notably:

  • Favreau Formula
  • Fulton-Favreau Formula
  • Victoria Charter

Later proposals to amend the basic constitution or institutions came with:

  • Bill C-60
  • Trudeau's unilateral proposals in 1980
  • Federal-Provincial Patriation agreement in 1981
  • Meech Lake
  • Charlottetown Accord

Feb 26: Trade & Commerce + Property & Civil Rights

Student Presentations:

Vignesh Peace Order & Good Government
Elisa International Trade & the Provices
Jeff Constitutional Issues with Interprovincial Agreements
Connor Natural Resources
Richard  The Rule of Law


Readings: 

  • Monahan, Chapters 9 &10

 

Trade & Commerce

Important additions to Canadian constitutional law are found in the judicial decisions interpreting the apparent conflict between the federal trade & commerce powers and the provincial property & civil rights powers.

Section 91 of the Constitution Act, 1867 gave the national parliament jurisdiction over the following economic matters:

  2. The Regulation of Trade and Commerce.
14. Currency and Coinage.
15. Banking, Incorporation of Banks, and the Issue of Paper Money.
16. Savings Banks. 17. Weights and Measures.
18. Bills of Exchange and Promissory Notes.
19. Interest.
20. Legal Tender.
21. Bankruptcy and Insolvency.
22. Patents of Invention and Discovery.
23. Copyrights.

However, s.92(13) gave the provinces jurisdiction over "Property and civil rights in the province." Other powers over economic issues are provided by two other provision in s.92:

10. Local Works and Undertakings other than such as are of the following Classes:--

(a) Lines of Steam or other Ships, Railways, Canals, and other Works and Undertakings connecting the Province with any other or others of the Provinces, or extending beyond the Limits of the Province;

(b) Lines of Steam Ships between the Province and any British or Foreign Country;

(c) Such Works as, although wholly situate within the Province, are before or after the Execution declared by the Parliament of Canada to be for the general Advantage of Canada or for the Advantage of Two or more of the Provinces.

11. The Incorporation of Companies with Provincial Objects.

A seminal case by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, Citizens' Insurance Co. v. Parsons (1881) 7 App.Cas. 96,, held that the federal power over trade & commerce did not include "The power to regulate by legislation contracts of a particular business or trade, such as the business of fire insurance in a single province" (at. 113). Trade & commerce was said to include:

  • inter-provincial and international trade
  • "general regulation of trade affecting the whole dominion"

A limited view of the trade & commerce power prevailed through the 1920s. In the 1922 Board of Commerce case, Viscount Haldane came close to characterizing trade & commerce as an ancillary power.

Several decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada have since outlined what may be meant by the 'general' trade & commerce power first alluded to in Citizens' Insurance. The 1976 Vapour case set out three points:

  • general regulatory scheme
  • administered by a regulatory agency
  • concerned with trade in general and not a specific industry

The 1989 General Motors case added two more:

  • if the provinces are constitutionally unable to act
  • the non-participation of one or more provinces would scuttle the scheme.

 

Mar 5: Constitutional Conventions

Student Presentations:

Amanda Gambling
Brett Gambling
Nicholas Fixed election date legislation
Michael Fixed election date legislation
Derek Senate Elections
Scott Senate elections

 

Readings: 

  • Heard, Canadian Constitutional Conventions (On Reserve), Chapters 1 & 2

Constitutional conventions play a vital role in Canada's constitutional framework. The legal structure outlined in the various constitutional documents is very archaic and incomplete. Even in 1867, one needed to refer to conventions to understand how the Canadian structure of government was supposed to operate.

Conventions can arise in several different ways:

  • Conventions can arise over time, through political practice, with a sense of obligation establishing the practice as a rule that others must follow.
  • They can be created instantly by express agreement among the principal political actors. Imperial Conferences in 1920s and 1930 created conventions by agreement that were steps along the way to independence for the Dominions at the time.  
  • They can sometimes be unilaterally established by a political actor with authority over other actors that would be bound by the rule. For example, the prime minister can set rules for cabinet behavior.

Traditional views of conventions separated them strictly from law. Conventions are rules of political morality that are not to be enforced by the courts.

Three views of conventions

1) Some authors view conventions essentially as guidelines without rigid terms and clear duties.

2) The traditional view of conventions holds that they are rules that arise out of political practise. The practice becomes a rule when it is clear that political actors consider themselves obligated

Sir Ivor Jennings test for identifying a conventions was adopted by the Supreme Court: "…first, what are the precedents; secondly did the actors in the precedents believe they were bound by a rule; thirdly, is there a reason for the rule?"

The role of precedent is determinative in the traditional view.  As Forsey wrote:

A constitutional convention without a single precedent to support it is a house without any foundation. …Indisputably, at least one precedent is essential. If there is no precedent, there is no convention

However, several sets of problems emerge from these traditional views of convention:

a) Views of political actors

  • Internal morality versus critical morality
  • Ignorance, bias, deceit, institutional bias

b) Role of precedents

  • Outdated
  • Conflicting
  • Missing – are they truly absent or example of negative precedent (rule of abstention)

3) Conventions may also be viewed as rules created by obligations to protect basic constitutional principles.

For external morality there must be a broad consensus of opinion, covering the ‘attentive public.’  Discussions of conventions often canvass academics, judicial decisions, retired politicians, political commentators, editorials, etc.

 

Mar 12: The Courts

Student Presentations:

Cyrus Provincial competence in Intl Relations
Nicole Constitutional Amendment
Arsh Emergency Measures
Aachal Anti-Terrorism Act
Paula Anti-Terrorism Act
Erik Aboriginal Self Government
Sarah Aboriginal Self Government

 

Readings: Monahan, Chapter 4, section D (pages129-144)

Reading for those with a further interest in voting among the Supreme Court Judges: 

  • Andrew Heard, "The Charter in the Supreme Court of Canada: The Importance of Which Judges Hear an Appeal", (1991) 24 Canadian Journal of Political Science 289. 

 See a diagram of Canada's Court System to understand the basic structure and hierarchy. 

The "section 96 courts" pose a problem in provincial attempts top delegate judicial functions to administrative tribunals. Re Residential Tenancies Act, [1981] 1 S.C.R. 714 is main decision on this issue and sets out a three part test to determine whether provincial legislation is valid:

1. Historical inquiry - does the act empower a tribunal to exclusively exercise superior court powers?
2. Is “judicial’ power involved?
3. Institutional setting - does the new institutional setting provide a sufficiently different setting to create a substantial difference from the original superior court context?

A fourth consideration was added by MacMillan Bloedel v Simpson [1995] 1 SCR 704, in which the majority of the Supreme Court held that there were some core functions of a superior court that could not be granted exclusively to another body.

Remedies available through the courts

Prerogative Writs:

certiorari - deals with validity of proceedings or can quash erroneous findings

prohibition - prohibits body from exceeding jurisdiction or "usurping"

mandamus - compels a body or official to perform a certain act

quo warranto - "by what right or authority" an official holds office

habeas corpus - "you have the body" - inquiry into legal basis for holding someone in custody

Declaratory judgment - a statement of the law on a particular point

Injunction - orders a halt to something to prevent injury to someone’s interests

Ex parte - a case that proceeds without the presence of the responding party

 

Mar 19: Protecting Rights

Student Presentations:

Lorraine Health care or environment
Chris Arctic sovereignty
Kaitelin Arctic sovereignty
Tom S.1 of the Charter
Matthews s.33 of the Charter
Taryn s.33 of the Charter

 

Readings: Hogg, Chapters 34 & 35

Different Rights documents in Canada have had different operative clauses that provide unique relationships between them and other statutes:

Bill of Rights 1960

2. Every law of Canada shall, unless it is expressly declared by an Act of the Parliament of Canada that it shall operate notwithstanding the Canadian Bill of Rights, be so construed and applied as not to abrogate, abridge or infringe or to authorize the abrogation, abridgment or infringement of any of the rights or freedoms herein recognized and declared, and in particular, no law of Canada shall be construed or applied so as to...

Quebec Charter of Human Rights & Freedoms

52. No Provision of any Act, even subsequent to the Charter, may derogate from sections 1 to 38, except so far as provided by those sections, unless such Act expressly states that it applies despite the Charter.

Constitution Act, 1982

52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.

  • civil liberties & civil rights
  • legislative bill of rights

Three types of human rights legislation:

  • Anti-discrimination laws aimed at interactions to prevent discrimination in employment, housing, and services by private parties and government officials. There is no statement in these laws about their application to other statutes. Examples: New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and PEI.
  • Anti-discrimination laws that also include a statement that they take precedence over other legislation. Examples: BC, Manitoba, Ontario and Newfoundland & Labrador
  • Civil rights statutes that include anti-discrimination provisions along with other types of rights. Examples: Canadian Bill of Rights and Alberta (+ fundamental rights), Saskatchewan (+ fundamental rights + political rights), and Quebec (+fundamental + political + legal + social economic)

The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code contains the strongest statement of its precedence over other legislation: "s.44. Every law of Saskatchewan is inoperative to the extent that it authorizes or requires the doing of anything prohibited by this Act unless it falls within an exemption provided by this Act or unless it is expressly declared by an Act of the Legislature to operate notwithstanding this Act."

However, only the Canadian Bill of Rights and the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms have been used by the courts to invalidate contradictory legislation. The courts have used the Quebec Charter to declare other laws inoperative more frequently than the Canadian Bill of Rights

Several human rights statutes expressly allow other statutes to operate notwithstanding. Examples: Canadian Bill of Rights, Alberta, and Saskatchewan.  The Canadian Human Rights Code exempts the Indian Act from its application.

 

Mar 26 & Apr 2: Charter of Rights 

Student Presentations:

Barbara Future of the Monarchy
Spencer Dissolution/Prorogation
Stephen Citizenship
Shabnam Citizenship
Tasheen Appointments to SCC
Faith Judicial Activism vs Restraint

 

Readings: Monahan, chapter 13

Entrenched rights - The Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms

  • S.1 - the clause that guarantees and limits rights
    • Substantive rights:
      • Section 2 - Fundamental Rights
      • Sections 3 to 5 - Democratic Rights
      • Section 6 - Mobility Rights
      • Sections 7 to 14 - Legal Rights
      • Section 15 - Equality Rights
      • Sections 16 to 23 - Language Rights
  • Section 24 - Remedies
  • Section 32 - Application of the Charter
  • Section 33 - the Notwithstanding Clause
    • most recent use of s.33 was by the Alberta Legislature in 2000, to exclude same sex couples from coverage in the provincial Marriage Act.
    • an instance in which it was advocated but not used advocated came in a  Reform Party motion to use s.33 to protect laws banning child pornography
See a 2007 Strategic Counsel survey of Canadian attitudes towards the Charter of Rights.
    • judicial discretion in Charter cases involves deciding:
      • scope & content of the right
      • whether there is an infringement of that right
      • in the case of a law, whether the infringement is justifiable under s.1
      • what remedy, if any, should be given
    • question of institutional capacity of judicial process for policy making
    • judicial sovereignty vs. constitutional sovereignty
    • remedies and interpretative guidelines

     

    Apr 9: Cont'd  Aboriginal Rights - ESSAYS DUE TODAY

    Student Presentations:

    George Quebec
    Jay TBA - Charter
    M.J. Freedom of Expression
    Amirah Freedom of Expression
    Mohammed Religion

    Readings: Monahan, chapter 14

    Aboriginal issues are covered by several provisions in Canadian constitutional documents.  The earliest significant document is the The Royal Proclamation of 1763, which provided (among other things) that only the Crown could negotiate with First Nations and acquire title to their lands. Although the proclamation did not cover the whole of British North America, it has become important in recent constitutional law because of this recognition of aboriginal title to land.

    The Constitution Act, 1867 stipulated in s. 91(24) that the federal government has responsibility for "Indians, and Lands reserved for Indians." Additional federal authority flows from inheritence of Crown obligations and prerogative powers from Britain.

    Provincial laws of ‘general application’ also apply to aboriginals and bands within the province (reinforced by s.88 of the Indian Act). But provinces can’t single out Indians, or essentially undermine treaty right or Indian status regulated by federal government.

     In R v Guerin [1984] 2 SCR 335, the SCC held that the Crown has a sui generis fiduciary duty towards aboriginals. This principle enlarged upon in R v Sparrow [1990] 1 SCR 1075.  The nature of this fiduciary duty is unclear; while it is drawn from the common law it is significantly different. In common law the holder of a fiduciary duty would not have competing obligations to other parties.  This duty was later held to apply to land that was claimed by first nations, even if the title was still not settled. The crown has a ‘duty to consult’ according to the SCC in Haida Nation v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests), [2004] 3 S.C.R. 511; the ‘honour of the crown’ was said to be in play. Third parties (such as resource companies) do not carry this obligation, because ‘the honour of the crown cannot be delegated.’

    The Constitution Act, 1982 fundamentally altered the constitutional position of Canada's aboriginal peoples, with the entrenchment of aboriginal rights:

    25. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed so as to abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal, treaty or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal peoples of Canada including
    (a) any rights or freedoms that have been recognized by the Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763; and
    (b) any rights or freedoms that may be acquired by the aboriginal peoples of Canada by way of land claims settlement.

    35.(1) The existing aboriginal and treaty rights of the aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognized and affirmed.

    (2) In this Act, "aboriginal peoples of Canada" includes the Indian, Inuit, and Metis peoples of Canada.

    (3) For greater certainty, in subsection (1) "treaty rights" includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired.

    (4) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the aboriginal and treaty rights referred to in subsection (1) are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.

    35.1 The government of Canada and the provincial governments are committed to the principal that, before any amendment is made to Class 24 of section 91 of the "Constitution Act, 1867", to section 25 of this Act or to this Part,

    (a) a constitutional conference that includes in its agenda an item relating to the proposed amendment, composed of the Prime Minister of Canada and the first ministers of the provinces, will be convened by the Prime Minister of Canada; and

    (b) the Prime Minister of Canada will invite representatives of the aboriginal peoples of Canada to participate in the discussions on that item.

    Complex issues are raised as to what exactly are the rights in s.35 actually comprise, and also to whom they apply. There are difficulties in resolving issues of ancestry, identity, and social inclusion.

    The SCC defined the Métis people in R v Pawley [2003] 2 SCR 2007 as not applying to all people of mixed heritage but “to distinctive peoples who, in addition to their mixed ancestry, developed their own customs, way of life, and recognizable group identity separate from their Indian, Innuit or European forebears.” (At para10.) Many people with mixed Indian and non-aboriginal heritage possess official Indian status, while others live within the general community with no formal affiliation with aboriginal communities.

    The aboriginal rights mentioned in s.35 have been interpreted in a number of cases. Aboriginal rights were defined in R v Van der Peet [1996] 2 SCR 507 as an activities which “must be an element of a practice, custom or tradition integral to the distinctive culture of the aboriginal group asserting the right.” The activity must also be something clearly established as existing at the time of contact with Europeans.

    Treaty rights are dependent upon formal treaties reached between the Crown and paritcular aboriginal communities. The nature of treaties has varied over the years: from the "peace and friendship" treaties in Atlantic Canada signed in the 18th century, to the "numbered" treaties negotiated in the late 19th century by the Canadian government in the western provinces. The modern treaty process started in the late 20th century is focused on "comprehensive" treaties, that involve land claims and self-government.

    Treaty rights are separate from policy benefits, such as a range of tax exemptions or tuition waivers, that the federal and provincial governments have extened to aboriginals.

    The JCPC held that there was no spcific aboriginal title to land in the St Catherine's Milling case in 1888; that case held that aboriginals only possessed a right to enjoy land that actually belonged to the Crown. However, aboriginal claim to land title waslater recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada in Calder [1973] SCR 313. Subsequently, aboriginal title to land has been declared to be ‘sui generis’ (one of a kind). Aboriginal title was distinguished from regular land title by the Supreme Court of Canada in Delgamuukw (1997) because it involves:
    - ‘pre-sovereignty’ occupancy of land
    - range of land use may be restricted
    - title is inalienable except to Crown
    - title is held communally
    - constitutionally protected

    The Supreme Court has not, as yet, found that s.35 includes the inherent right to self-government; the closest they have come is to say "assuming without deciding" in one case. However, many argue that the logic of the Court's other cases leads one almost inevitably to assume that it will make this ruling in due course.

    Note that an interesting constitutional wrinkle now occurs when new treaties are signed. Because the wording of s.35 and the SCC's subsequent interpretation of it, any new treaties that are signed now become a part of the Constitution. As a result, treaties become part of the "Supreme Law" referred to in s.52 and should consequently trump ordinary legislation.  As yet, the SCC has not delivered any clear decision on this constitutional status and potential conflicts with other legislation.

    Self-government can be, and has been, implemented by ordinary legislation or by a combination of treaties and legislation, with five possible models of self-government.

    • The Sechelt Band in BC achieved a ‘municipal’ style of self-government, under federal legislation passed in 1986.
    • A ministerial delegation model has also been used. In Manitoba, the administration of almost all the functions of the Department of Indian Affairs have been devolved to local band councils.
    • A treaty model has been used with the Nisga’a and a number of other bands in the northern territories, starting in the 1990s.
    • There is the possibility of a yet-to-be-defined constitutional model where the courts rule that s.35 includes the right to self-government; what that entails would have to be elaborated upon by either the courts or through political negotiation between the First Nations and the federal & provincial governments.
    • The public model is found in the creation of Nunavut, which resulted from negotiations between the federal government and Inuit of the Eastern Arctic to settle outstanding land claims.

     

    Tues April 16:   FINAL EXAM -- 3:30-5:30  (2 hours) 

 

 


  ©Copyright Andrew Heard 2006-13
 
 
 

eXTReMe Tracker