Chpt. Head – Sub –Topic Imp.

Cases Quick Case Facts- Principle Craik

Pg. ref F.Sumary
Ch.2 Leg. Positivism & Re Drummond Restrictive covenant is void as against public policy - as it tends to create divisions Crk-p.9-12
7-77 Theory Natural Law Wren between religious or ethnic groups F. Sum.-
p.2

Nat. Re Noble and No est. principle to strike down the covenant --Parliament/Leg. should decide what is Crk-p.12-
Div. Wolfe the best for public good 16
& (opp. of F. Sum.-
Sour- above) p.2
ces
of Feminist i) Edwards v. S.24, BNA Act- Def. of qualified persons-if women were excluded to be treated as Crk- p.17
Law pers. AG Canada ‘Persons’ to be summoned or to be senators –SCC took traditional interpretation, held- F. Sum.-
(Persons’ Women-NOT persons – Privy Council HELD- defn. includes women as PERSONs p.3
i)Early Case)
Formalist

ii)Contemp. ii) R. v. 3 doctors –charged with procuring miscarriage of women--Whether S.251,Cr. Code (that Crk. –p.21
Feminism Morgentaler criminalizes abortion) was contrary to S.7 of the Charter—Right to reproduce is an F. Sum.-
integral part of women’s dignity as human being and so that offended Charter right p.4

CLS (Critical R. v. R.D.S. White Police arrested 15 yr old black boy –J. while acquitting commented that Police Crk.- p.27
Legal over-reacted in dealing with Non-white – Whether J. has been partial between accused F. Sum.-
Studies) &Crown & there is reasonable apprehension of bias –HELD-Although Judge’s comment if p.4
viewed in isolation, may seem unnecessary, But for a reasonable person aware of all
circums. it would not be reasonable apprehension of bias-so, Acquittal by trial J. was
Restored

Law and Bank of Mutual trust backed out of the deal when real estate collapsed & the Bank of Am.-Can Crk. P.-37
Economics America Can. incurred loss about $10 million- An award of compound interest will prevent the (not in
v. Mutual respondent from profiting by its breach at the expense of the appellant- Trial Judge’s Found.
Trust Co. judgment awarding pre & post judgment compound interest Restored Summary)

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 1
 Hist, Custom-
Tradition

Can. Mitchell v. Aboriginal interest &customary law-presumed to survive, unless-->they were Crk.- p.43
Legal Law & MNR incompatible with Crown’s sovereignty, -unless surrendered voluntarily through traty F. Sum.-
Inherit Aboriginal process, -unless extinguished by Govt.—aborg. rights u/s.35 cannot be abolished p.8
People unilaterally by Govt.

Delgamuukw Chiefs of 2 tribes claimed aboriginal title in land—To Claim>Must Prove=*Land to be Crk.- p.44
v. BC occupied prior soverigny - *continuity between present and pre-sovereignty occupation- F. Sum-
*Must be exclusive possesstion—IF, wishes to use in different way from that Title p..8
permits, will have to submit to Crown to convert

Common Rec. EurLaw- Pls. see foundation summary, pg.9how the rules of Comm.Law and Equity are now Crk.- p.48
Law & Civil Cooper applied concurrently in all superior courts, with Equity prevails in cases of conflict –no F. Sum.-.9
Law v.Stuart case facts…
Tradition
Nature of
Com. & Civil
Law

Comn Law & Trust restricted Scholarship for White Christians of British nationality/ parentage- Can Crk.- p.56
Precedent- cy-pres doctrine be applied to preserve the trust -- no Q. of fact/ here is only Q. of law – Not in F.
CanadaTrust p.59> HELD: Cy-Pres doctrine was invoked to bring the Trust into accord with Public Summary
Co. v. Ont Policy by removing all offensive restrictions, thus permitting it to remain a scholarship
Hum Rights (following Equity?)
Comm.

Equity-
Common i) Conflicting parents- appellants Rom.Catholic and Respondents Protestants—child Crk.- p.61
Law & i)Re DeLaurier identified as with Respondents’ church –in this case, father’s wishes as are in conflict F.Sum-p10
Equity (of 1934) with the best interest of the child-->Court relies on Equity and child’s interest -
protected---
Crk.- p.60
F.Sum-p10

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 2
 ii)Guerin v. ii) Musqueam Band sued re: leasing of a golf club in Indian reserve land – HELD-Crown
Canada had fiduciary duty and was in breach of trust

Crown’s Child placed in foster home sexually abused->whether government was tortuously liable Crk.- p.64
Fiduciary Rel- for any conduct by foster people- HELD: govt. has fiduciary obligation to take care in F.Sum-p10
K.L.B. v. BC placing in proper home and for supervision—here->No evidence of negligence or
commiting harm in part of govt.->so, no breach of fiduciary duty…

Statutes & Helpern v. Seven gay and lesbian couple applied for marriage certificate- one church solemnized Crk.- p.72
Common Canada marriage- Clerk & Registrars refused to issue licence/accept marriage doc. –HELD: F.Sum-p11
Law marriage doesn’t have a constitutionally fixed meaning –common law def. of marriage
breached s.15(1) charter right and was not saved u/s.1 –as remedy common law defn.
changed

Summary of SyllCases->St. Hiliaire v.Canada/Patritiation Ref./ Baker v.Can/ De Guzman v.Can & Article of Bijuralism… @ Foundation Summry-Pg. 11-13

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 3
Ch.3: Recurring Const. Principles in Canadian Public Law

Sl Subj- Imp. Cases - Quick Case Facts- Principle Craik Sum

matter Page Nos.
1 Const. The Patriation Ref.- 82 11
Conven- const. convention-not law , matter of politics & can’t be enforced–However can be recognized by Court
tion Facts- Fed. wanted to bring in amending formula (for abolition of UK parliament auth. over legis. in Can)-Done without
full agreement of all provinces
Issue-is the agreement of provinces constitutionally req. to amend the constitution?
Held- *conventions cannot crystallize in law -*there is a convention that there must be substantial degree of provincial
consent before amending--BUT constitutional conventions cannot be enforced by the Courts

2 Unwritt. Ref. re. Secession of QC 88, 14

principl- Facts- PM raised Q. in this secession case-whether QC can unilaterally secede…… 105,
es of Held- as discussed in judgment->“Principles of Const. Supremacy” and “Rule of Law” are closely connected –Rule of 118,
Const. Law is broader that Constitutionalism—Unwritten principles of the const. , unlike conventions, have the force of law…/ 130
@p.105->3 elements of Rule of Law/

3 Rule of Roncarelli v. Duplessis (pre-charter case) 92 14

Law- Facts- - Director of Provin.Liquor Commission, acting u/express direction of Premier, revoked licence of a Montreal
Principl- restaurant who had posted bail for several hundreds of Jehovah’s witness (it was a group against Premier)
es of Held- --No statute can delegate absolute discretionary power – premier cannot manipulate power for personal
Const. vendetta -- All State officials are subject to legal order as ind. citizen – statutory powers must be limited within
purposes for which that power is granted –this is an unwritten principle of law and enforceable by judiciary

4 Rule of British Columbia v. Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. 95 15

Law- Facts- BC Legis. enacted the Tobacco Damages & Health Care Costs Recovery Act-created a civil cause of action in
Principl- favour of the govt. against tobacco manufacturers with respect to health care costs -->it created evidentiary
es of presumptions and & it operated retrospectively
Const. Issue- whether law was constitutionally valid on the basis of – i) territorial jurisdiction, ii) principles of jud.
Independence, & iii) principles of the rule of law
Held- Rule of law is explained with its components – written const. has supremacy/ unwritten principles of const. law
are capable to bind the govt. action –Other const. principles of “democracy” and “constitutionalism” favours upholding
the validity of the Act that conforms to the express terms of const.—the Act is valid
5 Rule of British Columbia (AG) v. Christie –(rule of law does not incorporate right to access to counsel in all jud. Proceedings) 102
Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 4
 Law – Facts- -Mr. D. Christie, a litigation lawyer practicing for poor/low inc. people was not often paid at all –brought action
princpls to have the legal services tax declared unconstitutional, claiming that the poor are being denied access to justice
of rul of Issue- -whether right to be represented by lawyer before a court or tribunal is constitutionally protected…
law/ Held--3 principles of Rule of Law (para 20, p.103) are discussed –S.7, Charter implies right to counsel as an aspect of
what is procedural fairness, when life-liberty-security affected, But that doesn’t support a general const. right
incorp.
6 Sep. of Canada (P.M.) v. Khadr 112
Power/ Facts- Held-.—In exercising common law power under royal prerogative, Executive is not exempt from const. scrutiny –
Crown However, court has limited power to review exercise of the prerogative power --HELD-Canada breached Khadr’s S.7
Prerog./ Charter right in interviewing him while he was detained u/authority of US, But Court left it to the Govt. to decide how
Scope of best to respond to this Judgmnt in responsibility for foreign affairs and in conformity to the Charter -- Court declined
Jud. Rev to make order u/s. 24(1) that Fed. Govt. makes a formal request to US govt. for repatriation of Khadr to remdedy the
breach of s.7 Charter right of Kh
7 Parlmnt. Babcock v. Canada (Attn Gen) 116 17
Sovrngt Facts- BC lawyers sued Govt. for paying them less compared to Toronto Lawyrs on allegation of breach of fidu.
y- relationship –Govt. first disclosed some docs. in court/ but later on claimed Non-Disclosure as a statutory right of
unwrttn Cabinet for confidentiality - applicants relied on Unwritten Principle of Rule of Law for Disclosure against stat. right of
prncple cabinet
Issue- whether law on statutory right of cabinet confidentiality is valid against the unwritten principle of const. of rule
of law.
Held- Rule of Law cannot be taken to invalidate a statute to allow Crown rep. to identify certain docs. beyond
disclosure –law valid

8 Const. Hogan v. New Foundland (AG) 137

principl Facts- Hogan &others, claiming to represent adherents of Roman Cath. Faith, challenged validity of const. amendment
e re: to term 17 re: Terms of Union between Canada and NF on point of protection of minority as a principle of constitution
monirity Issue- whether the principle could support an obligation to negotiate with or consult a minority religious group…
right- Held- NF Court of Appeal decided – where an agreement is agreed in between Fed. & Provinc. Government of NF u/s.
43, they need not take any additional measures – leave to appeal to SC was refused

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 5
Chapter-4: Parliament and the Legislative Process

Sl. Subj- Imp. Cases - Quick Case Facts- Principle Craik Sum
matter Pg. Nos.
1 Monarch O’Donohue v. The Queen 150 21
& Const. Facts: O’Donohue, a Roman Cath. Canadian filed application for a declaration that the Imperial statute the Act of
and Legisl. Settlement, 1701 as discriminatory against Rom. Cath, and violative of the Equality provisions of the Charter
Process Held: The impugned portion of the said Act is a key element of the rules governing succession to the British Govt.
--Canada was est. as a const. monarchy. This fundamental aspect is maintained and recognized in The Constitution
Act, 1982. The office of Queen is such a fundamental part that amendment in respect of that office will require
unanimous consent of fed. & provincial consent—Rules of succession as per the impugned Act is necessary for
proper functioning of const. monarchy and so are not subject to charter scrutiny.

2 Senator Brown v. Alberta 156 21

appoint. Facts: Brown sued for declaration that the senator appointment provisions of the 1867 Act were contrary to
Process- democratic principles set out in the Secession Reference case when PM declined to appoint. The appellant was
Democr. elected under Alberta statute as a “Senate nominee”. He acknowledged at the time of appeal there was no vacancy
Pricple Held: There was no justiciable or legal issue and so the originating notice of motion was struck out as the Secession
Reference case did not change the law of the scope of court’s jurisdiction or legal issue….

3 Senator Samson v. AG of Canada 158 21

appoint. Facts: Samson applied to get an interlocutory inj. to restrain the GG a qualified person from Alberta unless he was
Process- elected u/ the Senatorial Selection Act
Political v. Held: It was a political issue/ not legal in nature – relief sought is available only in political area—thus appl. Fails to
Legal establish a issue to be tried
issue
4 Canada’s Reference re: Provincial Electoral Boundaries (Sask.) 161
Electoral Facts: constitutionality of “the variance of the size of the voter population among constituencies” & “distribution of
System – those constituencies among urban, rural and northern areas” were the issues for determination- whether violate
voting s.3, Charter right
Right-S.3 Held: The purpose of the right to vote enshrined in S.3 of the Charter is NOT equality of voting power per se, but the
right to “effective representation”.

5 Canada’s Figueroa v. Canada 170 22

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 6
 Electoral Facts: Canada Elections Act earlier required a registered party to run candidates in at least 50 electoral districts –
System whether that was violation of S.3 of the Charter
-voting Held: Parites that nominate less than 50 electoral dist. also do play meaning role in electoral process –this provision
Right-S.3 undermines citizens’’ rights & cannot be saved u/s 1 of the Charter (govt. has failed to show justification) –so ,
provision has been struck down

6 Parliame- Canada House of Commons v. Vaid (Chaffaur Vaid’s case re: Parliament. Privilege) 192 23
ntary Facts: Former Speaker of House of Commons dismissed his chaffaur Vaid. Whether a chauffaur’s dismissal can be
Privilege covered by Parliamentary privilege, even though he was in secondary role in the parliament & whether can Hum.
Rights Tribunal investigate Vaid’s complaint of dismissal on ground of workplace discrimination …
Held: No parliamentary privilege is available for such cases of secondary employment as, it was not necessarily
involved with parliamentary proceedings

7 Parliame- Bacon v. Sask. Crop Insurance Corp. 198 24

ment’s Fact: Govt. of Sask. enacted a legis. which included provisions relating to contractual obligations as binding on the
law farmers in Sask.—appellants claimed govt. had no authority to pass such law as govt. is also subject to rule of law
making Held: -Against the arbitrary use of power by officials, court provides protection—But, the law, including common
jurisd. law, is subject to change by legislation and when changed is the “one law for all”—Parliament has the power to
make law according to the will of the electors—There is no basis to challenge the validity of the legislation

8 Ct. not Turner v. Canada 203 24

interestd Facts: Legislation was passed to order the striking workers to go back to job. Union argued that legislation was
to contrary to rule of law, that parliament was tortuously misled to enact retroactive enactment and that respondent
interfere was denied a fair trial
in Leg. Held: The allegation against the parliament is not justiciable –statement of claims entirely struck down & actions
process dismissed

9 Legis. Wells v. New Foundland 203 24

process – Facts: Wells was appointed a member in Pub. Utility Board. As the board was restructured, he lost his position and
crown’s sought compensation as contractual obligation of the crown.
obligation Held: Crown had a contractual obligation and Wells was entitled to damages as that was not taken from him by
legislation

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 7
10 Parliamnt. Authorson v. Canada (AG) 207 24
Procedure Facts: A group of disabled war veterans was denied interest on the funds owed to him and that a full account was
–Bill of never made to him. Q. was whether Bill of Rights require Parliament to give just compensation?
Rights Held: Parliament has chosen to lawfully deny the veterans the benefits though Crown owed a fiduciary duty to
them. –Due process requirement in Bill of Rights does not grant procedural rights in the process of legislative
enactments.

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 8
Chapter-5: Exercise of Executive Authority

Sl. Subj- Imp. Cases - Quick Case Facts- Principle Craik Sum.
matter Pg. Nos.
1 Public. Fraser v. Canada (Public Service Staff Relations Board) 247 27
Servnts- Facts: Fraser, an employee of Rev. Canada was discharged as he repeatedly criticized govt. action of metrification.
Criticize He claimed duty to refrains from criticism only applies to the civil servants who are related to direct
govt. responsibilities.
action Held: Employment in public service involves acceptance of certain restraints and one of those restrains is to
exercise caution to criticize govt. action

2 Tribunal Ocean Port Hotel Ltd. v. B.C. (Gen.Manager, Liquor Control and Licensing Branch) 253 27
–indep? Facts: Ocean Port argued that the Board lacks sufficient independence to make rulings and penalty & as a result
as decision must be set aside
adjud. Held: The degree of independence has not been settled. – The Tribunal though not bound to the highest standard
Body & of independence by unwritten const. principles, But Must act impartially and meet a relatively high standard of
executiv independence both u/ common law and Bill of Rights

3 RCMP – R. Campbell 261

Pub. Facts -Held: A police off. Investigating a crime is not acting as a govt. functionary or an agent of anybody –s/he
Off? occupied a pub. Office intitially as defined by com. Law and subsequently set out in various statutes

4 Indpend Krieger v. Law Society (Alberta) 263

-ence of Facts- Held: Independence of Attn Gen. in deciding fairly who should be prosecuted is also a hallmark of a free
Attn. society. Just as the independence of the bar within its proper sphere must be respected, so must the independence
Gen of Attn.-Gen.

5 Municip Shell Canada Products Ltd. Vancouver (City) 267 27

ality’s Facts: Shell sought to quash the resolution passed by the Vancouver City council that directed staff not to conduct
power – business with Shell Canada as long as Shell continued business in South Africa, with the claim that resolution was
extra- beyond the power of the Municipality…
terri. Held: Municipality can exercise power only in relation to activities that fall within its purposes – Extra-territorial
issues purpose of the resolution was improper (issue of subsidiarity is relevant)

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 9
6 GG or Black v. Chretien 271 28
PM – in Facts: Black argued that actions of PM Chretien were not an exercise of Crown’s prerogative (argued that only GG
terms of can exercise crown’s preprogative0
Crown’s Held: passport is the property of the govt. of Canada and power to grant or withheld a passport is a prerogative
prerog. power-- P.M. Chretien was exercising honours prerogative power by giving advice to Queen about granting Black’s
peerage – this is not justiciable or judicially reviewable

7 Legis. Re Gray 277

capacity Facts: Farmers originally had exemption from enlisting in the army based on a statute. The executive took away
of that statute based on the regulations adopted under the War Measures Act. Grey argued that delegated powers
Deleg. cannot be broad enough to override a statute and cannot abdicate legislative authority.
authrity Held: A complete abdication by Parliament of its legislative functions is unconceivable. – It was within the
legislative authority of the Parliament of Canada to delegate to Governor in Council the power to enact the
impugned orders.

8 Extent - A-G NS v. A-G Can (Nova Scotia Inter-delegation) 279

Deleg. Facts-Held: Delegation has its source in the necessities of legislation –extent of delegation depends upon language
of legis. of the grant, sub-delegation authority can also be provided --

Chapter 6: Courts & Judiciary

1. Ref. Re: Remuneration of Judges – * independence of judiciary
2. Canada (Minister of Citizenship & Immigration) v. Tobiass
Facts/Issue- Whether meeting between government official and chief justice interfered with judicial independence -- If so, whether stay of
proceedings is appropriate remedy.
Held- there is no persuasive evidence of bad faith on the part of any of those involved, nor is there any solid evidence that the independence
of the judges in question was actually compromised. – Stay of Proceeding has not bee proper -- The appropriate remedy here is to have the
cases against the appellants go forward under the supervision of a judge of the Trial Division who has had nothing to do with the affairs that
form the subject matter of this appeal.

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 10
Chapter-7 : Statutory Interpretation

Sl. Subj- Imp. Cases - Quick Case Facts- Principle Craik Foun
matter Sum.
Pg. Nos.
1 When Re Witts and Attn Gen for B.C. 375
a word Facts: Witts bought a horse at “claiming race” with an intention to breed because of its excellent blood line. But
may he discovered that it was a gelding and therefore useless for breeding. He tried to rescind from the purchase by
have 2 objecting to the race stewards u/ the Horse Racing Rules and Regulations, BC.
mean – Held: The word ‘sex’ used in the Rules is capable of being used in both ways: one being the common meaning and
ings – the other being a particular meaning , as used by persons conversant with horse racing –the Commission did not
context err to conclude that petitioner’s protest is barred u/the Rules as the term ‘sex’ of a horse is understood in the
is racing fraternity –Petitioner is only left to seek remedy for any loss he incurred due to erroneous information
relevan published by the officials
t
2 when R. v. Daust 379
ordn. Facts: QC Police set up an operation using an undercover officer who went to Daust’s establishment (on previous
meanig suspicion) to sell goods which he hinted as stolen property – D. kept those and after 4 th incident, said that they
to be cannot always help to steal—D was charged to have property in possession/ transferred knowing them as stolen
taken Held: There was argument that the respondent did not “transfer the possession of the property”, which is
element of offence –Court supports its understanding of ‘transfer’ in its ordinary meaning – because, to reject
ordinary meaning, court will have to establish that there were cogent grounds to believe that some other
meaning was intended.

3 Legis. R. v. Chartrand 383

hist/ Facts: Accused invited a child to accompany him in his car so that he can take some photographs of him- Accused
purpos claimed, he was taking picts. of child to surprise the parents. He was charged with “abduction”. In the amended
e& provision, the word ‘unlawfully’ did not appear in the offences of abduction by parents, it was there in offences of
context abduction by the strangers in the Eng. version, but was deleted in French version
-relevn Held: As per the legislative history, purpose & context, French version reflects true intent; -- there was no
t necessity for the Crown to prove an additional unlawful act or elements of unlawfulness beyond the taking of a
child by a person who did not have lawful auth. over the child

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 11
4 when R. v. McIntosh 391
plain Facts: Mc. gave some sound equipment to deceased to repair; but for 8 months, deceased avoided to return
reading those. At one point, deceased told something to accused and got stabbed by the accused with a knife after some
accept- word exchanges’ Mc. Was charged with second degree murder & took the plea of self defence. He was convicted.
able to Q. was whether Trial J. erred in instructing the Jury that sec. 34(2) is not available to an intital aggressor..?
unders Held: While s. 34(1) includes the statement "without having provoked the assault", s. 34(2) does not. -- > If s.
-tand 34(2) is available to an initial aggressor who has killed or committed grievous bodily harm, then that accused may
Parliam be in a better position to raise self-defence than an initial aggressor whose assault was less serious; since s. 34(2)
-ent’s is only available to an aggressor who "causes death or grievous bodily harm", the less serious aggressor would not
intenti- fall under its ambit. --the history, the wording and the policy underlying s. 34(2) all point to one conclusion:
on Parliament did not intend it to apply to provoked assault.  It follows that the trial judge did not err in limiting
s. 34(2) in this way in his instructions to the jury. Conviction restored

5 Leg. Re Rizzo and Rizzo Shoes Ltd. 402

history Facts: The issue was whether the termination of employment caused by the bankruptcy of an employer give rise
-a tool to a claim provable in bankruptcy for termination pay and severance pay in accordance with the provisions of the
to Employment Standard Act
deter- Held: When the express words of ss. 40 and 40a are examined in their entire context, the words “terminated by
mine an employer” must be interpreted to include termination resulting from the bankruptcy of the employer. As all
the dismissed employees are equally in need of the protections u/ ESA, any distinction between employees whose
Leg. termination resulted from the bankruptcy of their employer and those who have been terminated for some other
intent. reason would be arbitrary and inequitable.

6 Purpos Medovarski v. Canada (Minster of Citizenship and Immigration) 411

of law Facts: 2 PR.s’ were given order of deportation on accusation of serious criminality; they appealed under the old
–Imp. law & Removal order automatically was stayed pursuant to provisions of former immigration legislation--Both
to appeals were discontinued as a result of a transitional provision (s. 196) of the new Immigration and Refugee
interp- Protection Act (IRPA), which took away the right to appeal ‘an order for removal’ unless a party had, under the
ret former Act, been “granted a stay”.  In each case, the trial judge set aside the decision to discontinue the appeal. 
Federal Court of Appeal allowed Ministry’s appeal  in both cases, holding that the purpose of the IRPA’s
transitional provision was to deny a right of appeal in the case of an automatic stay.
Held: Despite fairness argument raised by Appellant, S.196 of the IRPA, if properly interpreted , applies only to
actively granted “stays”— interpretation as per suggestion of PRs would lead to a legislative redundancy and be
inconsistent with the purpose of the IRPA

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 12
7 Legisl. Canada (Attn Gen) v. Mossop 418
Purpos Facts: Mossop applied for bereavement leave as he attended the funeral of a man who he claims to be his lover.
e is He was refused. The issue here is whether there has been any discrimination against Mossop on the basis of
imp. & “family status”.
that Held: J. finds Parliament’s clear intent throughout the Can Human Rights Act (CHRA), before and at the time of
can’t amendment in 1983, was to not extend to anyone protection from discrimination based on sexual orientation. –
be there is no Charter challenge and Charter cannot be used as a tool to defeat the purpose of the legislators –
defeat Appeal dismissed (M. failed)
d

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 13
Chapter-8 : Judicial Review

Sl. Subj- Imp. Cases - Quick Case Facts- Principle Craik Foun
matter Sum.
Pg. Nos.
1 Justific Marbury v. Madison 436 34
a-tion Principles: The principle of Const. Supremacy was laid down in this US case –Judiciary ensures that the written
for constitution prevails over ordinary legislation
Const.
Review
2 Justicia Operation Dismantle v. The Queen 439 34
-bility – Facts: Decision of the Federal Govt. to allow US to test cruise missiles in the territory of Canada was challenged
Limit. u/S.7 of the Charter.
of Jud. Held: There is no causal relationship between Government’s such decision and alleged violation of S.7 of the
Review Charter

3 Enforc Doucet-Boudreau v. Nova Scotia (Minister of Education) 446 35

e-ment Facts: Trial Court gave order of ‘structural injunction’ asking for report on progress of establishing the French
& Jud. Lang. School—whether this act is within jurisdiction
Review Held: A Superior Court can craft any remedy that is just and appropriate (for proper enforcement/ remedy)…..

4 Jud. Ref. Re Language Rights u/S.23 of the Manitoba Act (Manitoba Lang . Ref.) 454 35
Rev Facts: S.23 of Manitoba Act, 1870 states that all laws of Manitoba are to be printed in Eng. and French – but no
-temp. laws have been printed in French since then- Q. arose whether all laws of MB were of no force because of S.23?
validity Held: In order to avoid chaos, and to preserve rule of law, all MB laws were given temp. validity and force
of laws
5 Rel. Vriend v. Alberta 461 35
betwen Facts: Vriend claimed he was discriminated on ground of homo-sexuality, but Alberta Act (for Hum Rights) failed
Court to include sexual orientation & so V. could not get relief under that Act
& Held: Appropriate Remedy was to Read in sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination for the
Legis. purposes of the Act – Judges did not act undemocratically when Legis.-Exec. Decision was not reached in
u/Chrtr accordance with democr. Principles mandated by Charter

6 Ref. Re Remuneration of Judges 470

-syllabus case – > Charter as tool of interpretation / unwritten constitutional principle

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 14
7 Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) 475
-syllabus case -- > duty to be fair

8 Stand- Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick 485

ard of Facts: Dunsmuir, a court clerk whose “at pleasure” appointment was terminated—there were concerns for his
Jud. job performance, but that was alleged while dismissing him –he exercised statu. Right to grieve- Adjudicator said,
Rev. his termination was improper –Dept. of Justice sought for Jud. Rev. –Duns.’s appeal was didmissed
Held: Standard of review = mindsets judges should take when asked to scrutinize decisions—there are 3
standards->*Correctness=Judges can substitute their own decisions in its place -*Reasonableness
simpliciter=Could a reasonable person have reached that conclusion? -*Patent unreasonableness=Judges only
overturn if the decision is patently unreasonable ---In this case the standard was changed to 2 standards only:
correctness and reasonableness simpliciter
(Duns. Appeal failed)

9 Jud. Canada (Attn. Gen) v. Mowat 500

Rev – Facts: Mowat claimed compensation for harassments during her employment in Cdn. Force. She also claimed
legis. legal costs. The case before Can.HRT was disposed of on merit & she was awarded compensation and a huge
context legal cost. CF sought for Jud. Rev. Fed. Court applied standard of ‘reasonableness’ & concluded that CHRT had
& authority to award costs. Q. was whether CHRT had authority to award cost & whether standard of review was
purpos correct?
e Held:– The legis. context and purpose of the Act have been discussed to see the authority to award cost --The
Standard of Review is ‘Correctness’, so, appeal was allowed.

Summ._Book’sCases_Foundation by Weedon 15