DOCSLIB.ORG

Factum of the Respondent on Cross-Appeal, the Attorney General

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Factum of the Respondent on Cross-Appeal, the Attorney General Court File No.: 34788 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO) BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Appellant / Respondent on Cross-Appeal (Appellant in Appeal) - and - TERRI JEAN BEDFORD, AMY LEBOVITCH AND VALERIE SCOTT Respondents / Appellants on Cross-Appeal (Respondents in Appeal) - and - ATTORNEY GENERAL OF QUÉBEC/ PROCUREUR GÉNÉRAL DU QUÉBEC PIVOT LEGAL SOCIETY, DOWNTOWN EASTSIDE SEX WORKERS UNITED AGAINST VOILENCE SOCIETY AND PACE SOCIETY; SECRETARIAT OF THE JOINT UNITED NATIONS PROGRAMME ON HIV/AIDS; THE BRITISH COLUMBIA CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION; THE EVANGELICAL FELLOWSHIP OF CANADA; CANADIAN HIV/AIDS LEGAL NETWORK, THE BRITISH COLUMBIA CENTRE FOR EXCELLENCE IN HIV/AIDS and HIV & AIDS LEGAL CLINIC ONTARIO; WOMEN’S COALITION FOR THE ABOLITION OF PROSTITUTION; CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP, CATHOLIC CIVIL RIGHTS LEAGUE and REAL WOMEN OF CANADA; THE DAVID ASPER CENTRE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS; L’INSTITUT SIMONE DE BEAUVOIR; AWCEP ASIAN WOMEN FOR EQUALITY SOCIETY, operating as ASIAN WOMEN COALITION ENDING PROSTITUTION; and ABORIGINAL LEGAL SERVICES OF TORONTO INC. Interveners AND BETWEEN: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO Appellant / Respondent on Cross-Appeal (Appellant in Appeal) - and - TERRI JEAN BEDFORD, AMY LEBOVITCH AND VALERIE SCOTT Respondents / Appellants on Cross-Appeal (Respondents in Appeal) - and - ATTORNEY GENERAL OF QUÉBEC/ PROCUREUR GÉNÉRAL DU QUÉBEC PIVOT LEGAL SOCIETY, DOWNTOWN EASTSIDE SEX WORKERS UNITED AGAINST VOILENCE SOCIETY AND PACE SOCIETY; SECRETARIAT OF THE JOINT UNITED NATIONS PROGRAMME ON HIV/AIDS; THE BRITISH COLUMBIA CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION; THE EVANGELICAL FELLOWSHIP OF CANADA; CANADIAN HIV/AIDS LEGAL NETWORK, THE BRITISH COLUMBIA CENTRE FOR EXCELLENCE IN HIV/AIDS and HIV & AIDS LEGAL CLINIC ONTARIO; WOMEN’S COALITION FOR THE ABOLITION OF PROSTITUTION; CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP, CATHOLIC CIVIL RIGHTS LEAGUE and REAL WOMEN OF CANADA; THE DAVID ASPER CENTRE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS; L’INSTITUT SIMONE DE BEAUVOIR; AWCEP ASIAN WOMEN FOR EQUALITY SOCIETY, operating as ASIAN WOMEN COALITION ENDING PROSTITUTION; and ABORIGINAL LEGAL SERVICES OF TORONTO INC. Interveners FACTUM OF THE RESPONDENT, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA, ON CROSS APPEAL (pursuant to Rule 43(1)(b) of the Supreme Court Rules) Counsel for the Appellant Agent for the Appellant Department of Justice William F. Pentney Ontario Regional Office Department of Justice The Exchange Tower Deputy Attorney General of Canada 130 King Street West East Memorial Building Suite 3400, Box 36 234 Wellington Street Toronto, Ontario M5X 1K6 Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8 Per: Michael H. Morris Per: Christopher Rupar Tel: (416) 973-9704 Tel: 613-941-2351 Fax: (416) 973-0809 Fax: 613-954-1920 Email: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] REGISTRAR SUPREME COURT OF CANADA 301 Wellington Street Ottawa, ON K1A 0J1 Jamie Klukach Robert E. Houston, Q.C. Christine Bartlett-Hughes Burke-Robertson Megan Stephens Barristers & Solicitors Ministry of the Attorney General 200-441 MacLaren Street 720 Bay Street, 10th floor Ottawa, ON K2P 2H3 Toronto, Ontario M7A 2S9 Tel: (416) 326-2351 Tel: 613-566-2058 Fax: (416) 326-4656 Fax: 613-235-4430 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Appellant in Agent for the Appellant in Appeal/Intervener, Appeal/Intervener, the Attorney General of the Attorney General of Ontario Ontario Alan Young Fiona Campbell Osgoode Hall Law School Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP Ignat Kaneff Building 30 Metcalfe Street, Suite 500 4700 Keele St Ottawa, ON K1P 5L4 Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3 72 Walder Avenue Tel: 613-482-2451 Toronto, ON M4P 2S2 Fax: 613-235-3041 Email: [email protected] Tel: (416) 736-5595 Fax: (416) 736-5736 Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Respondent and Appellant in Agent for the Respondent and Appellant in Cross-Appeal, Terri Jean Bedford Cross-Appeal, Terri Jean Bedford Marlys A. Edwardh Fiona Campbell Daniel Sheppard Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP 30 Metcalfe Street, Suite 500 20 Dundas St. W., Suite 1100 Ottawa, ON K1P 5L4 Toronto, ON M5G 2G8 Tel: 416-979-6442 Tel: 613-482-2451 Fax: 416-979-4430 Fax: 613-235-3041 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for the Respondent and Appellant in Agent for the Respondent and Appellant in Cross-Appeal, Valerie Scott Cross-Appeal, Valerie Scott Stacey Nichols Fiona Campbell Neuberger Rose LLP Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP 1392 Eglinton Avenue West 30 Metcalfe Street, Suite 500 Toronto, Ontario Ottawa, ON K1P 5L4 M6C 3E4 Tel: (416) 364-3111 Tel: 613-482-2451 Fax: (416) 364-3271 Fax: 613-235-3041 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] AND Agent for the Respondent and Appellant in Cross-Appeal, Amy Lebovitch Ron (Yaron) Marzel, Marzel Law 265 Rimrock Road, Suite 200 Toronto, Ontario M3J 3C6 Tel: (416) 485-5200 Ext. 233 Fax: (416) 485-1610 Email: [email protected] Counsel for the Respondent and Appellant in Cross-Appeal, Amy Lebovitch Me Sylvain Leboeuf Me Pierre Landry DIRECTION GENÉRALE DES AFFAIRES Noël & AssociÉs s.e.n.e.r.l. JURIDIQUES ET LÉGISLATIVES 111, rue Champlain 1200, route de l’Église, 2 étage Gatineau (Québec) J8X 3R1 Québec (Québec) G1V 4M1 Tél : 418-643-1477 Tel : 819-771-7393 Téléc : 418-646-1696 Téléc : 819-771-5397 [email protected] [email protected] Correspondants pour le Procureur général du Procureurs du Procureur général du Québec Québec Katrina E. Pacey Jeffrey Beedell Pivot Legal Society McMillan LLP 121 Heatley Avenue Suite 300-50 O’Connor Street Vancouver, BC V6A 3E0 Ottawa, ON K1P 6L2 T: 604-255-9700 T: 613-232-7171 F: 604-255-1552 F: 613-231-3191 E: [email protected] E: [email protected] Counsel for Pivot Legal Society, Downtown Agent for Pivot Legal Society, Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence and PACE Society and PACE Society Michael A. Feder Patricia J. Wilson McCarthy Tétrault LLP Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP Suite 1300, 777 Dunsmuir Street 340 Albert Street Vancouver, BC V7Y 1K2 Suite 1900 T : 604-643-5983 Ottawa, Ontario F : 604-622-5614 K1R 7Y6 E : [email protected] Telephone: (613) 787-1009 Counsel for the Secretariat of the Joint United FAX: (613) 235-2867 Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS E-mail: [email protected] Agent for the Secretariat of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS Georgialee A. Lang Eugene Meehan, Q.C. Donald Hutchison Supreme Advocacy LLP Evangelical Fellowship of Canada 397 Gladstone Avenue 130 Albert Street Suite 100 Suite 1810 Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0Y9 Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5G4 Telephone: (613) 695-8855 Ext: 101 Telephone: (613) 233-9868 FAX: (613) 695-8580 FAX: (613) 233-0301 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Counsel for the Evangelical Fellowship of Agent for the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada Canada Jonathan Shime/ Marie-France Major Megan Schwartzentruber Supreme Advocacy LLP Cooper Sandler Shime & Bergman LLP 397 Gladstone Ave, Suite 100 439 University Avenue Ottawa, ON K2P 0Y9 Suite 1900 T: 613-695-8855 ext: 102 Toronto, ON F: 613-695-8580 M5G 1Y8 E: [email protected] Tel: 416-585-9191 Fax: 416-408-2372 Agent for the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, the British Columbia Centre for HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario Excellence in HIV/AIDS and the HIV & AIDS 65 Wellesley Street East, Suite 400 Legal Clinic Ontario (HALCO) Toronto ON M5Y 1G7 Renée Lang Ryan Peck Tel: 416-340-7790 Fax: 416-3407248 Counsel for the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, the British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS and the HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario (HALCO) Brent B. Olthuis/ Megan Vis-Dunbar Michael J. Sobkin Hunter Litigation Chambers Barrister & Solicitor 2100-1040 West Georgia Street 2-90 Boulevard de Lucerne Vancouver, BC V6E 4H1 Gatineau, QC J9H 7K8 T: 604-891-2400 T : 819-778-7794 F : 604-647-4554 F : 819-778-1740 E : [email protected] E : [email protected] Counsel for the British Columbia Civil Agent for the British Columbia Civil Liberties Liberties Association Association Fay Faraday Nadia Effendi 860 Manning Ave. Borden Ladner Gervais LLP Toronto, ON M6G 2W8 100 Queen St., Suite 1100 T: 416-389-4399 Ottawa, ON K1P 1J9 F: 647-776-3147 T: 613-237-5160 E: [email protected] F: 613-230-8842 E: [email protected] Janine Benedet Faculty of Law University of British Columbia 1822 East Mall Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z1 T: 604-822-0637 F: 604-822-8108 E : [email protected] Counsel for the Intervener, Women’s Coalition Agent for the Intervener, Women’s Coalition for the Abolition of Prostitution for the Abolition of Prostitution Christa Big Canoe Emily Hill Legal Advocacy Director, Aboriginal Legal Service of Toronto 415 Yonge Street, Suite 803 Toronto, ON M5B 2E7 T: 416-408-4041 ext: 225 F: 416-408-4268 E: [email protected] Counsel for the Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto Robert W. Staley/ Ranjan K. Agarwal Bennett Jones LLP Bennett Jones LLP World Exchange Plaza 3400 One First Canadian Place 1900-45 O’Connor Street P.O. Box 130 Ottawa, Ontario Toronto, ON M5X 1A4 K1P 1A4 T: 416-863-1200 F: 416-863-1716 Tel: 613-683-2300 E: [email protected] Fax: 613-683-2323 Counsel for Christian Legal Fellowship, Agent for Christian Legal Fellowship, Catholic Catholic Civil Rights League and Real Women Civil Rights League and Real Women of of Canada Canada Me Walid Hijazi Me Frédérick Langlois Desrosiers, Joncas, Massicotte, senc. Deveau, Bourgeois, Gagné, Hébert & Associés, 480, boul. St-Laurent, B-503 S.E.N.C.R.I. Montréal, QC H2Y 3Y7 867, boulevard Saint-René Ouest, suite 8 Gatineau, Québec T: 514-397-9284 J8T 7X6 F: 514-397-9922 Tel: 819-243-2616 E: [email protected] Fax: 819-243-2461 Counsel for L’Institut Simone de Beauvoir Agent for L’Institut Simone de Beauvoir Joseph J.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Costs of Charter Litigation
    The Costs of Charter Litigation Alan Young Research and Statistics Division May 3, 2016 Information contained in this publication or product may be reproduced, in part or in whole, and by any means, for personal or public non-commercial purposes, without charge or further permission, unless otherwise specified. You are asked to: exercise due diligence in ensuring the accuracy of the materials reproduced; indicate both the complete title of the materials reproduced, as well as the author organization; and indicate that the reproduction is a copy of an official work that is published by the Government of Canada and that the reproduction has not been produced in affiliation with or with the endorsement of the Government of Canada. Commercial reproduction and distribution is prohibited except with written permission from the Department of Justice Canada. For more information, please contact the Department of Justice Canada at: www.justice.gc.ca. © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, 2017 ISBN 978-0-660-07504-4 Cat. No. J2-441/2017E-PDF The Costs of Charter Litigation Introduction The enactment of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 fundamentally altered both the substance and form of constitutional review. In the first decade of Charter litigation, many novel claims were advanced and resolved, yet there still remained a great deal of confusion with respect to the scope of the substantive principles and the procedural mechanisms for raising and applying them. After 35 years, most of the relevant constitutional principles have been solidified and clarified, as have the guidelines on the procedures for mounting a constitutional challenge.
    [Show full text]
  • Deadly Inertia: a History of Constitutional Challenges to Canada's Criminal Code Sections on Prostitution
    Beijing Law Review, 2011, 2, 33-54 33 doi:10.4236/blr.2011.22005 Published Online June 2011 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/blr) Deadly Inertia: A History of Constitutional Challenges to Canada’s Criminal Code Sections on Prostitution John Lowman School of Criminology, Simon Fraser University, University Drive, Burnaby, Canada. Email: [email protected] Received June 10th, 2010; revised February 18th, 2011; accepted March 24th, 2011. ABSTRACT This paper examines rhetoric surrounding prostitution law reform in Canada from 1970 to the present. During the 1950s and 1960s, there was very little media or political attention paid to prostitution. It was not until the mid 1970s that perceived problems with prostitution law began to surface, driven by concerns that the criminal code statute pro- hibiting street prostitution was not enforceable. In 1983 the Liberal government appointed the Special Committee on Pornography and Prostitution to consider options for law and policy reform. However, the Conservative government that received the report in 1985 rejected the sweeping law changes the Special Committee recommended, opting instead to rewrite the street prostitution offence. Since then the murder of somewhere between 200 and 300 street prostitutes has prompted renewed calls for law reform. The debate on law reform culminated in 2006 with a parliamentary review that saw all four federal political parties agreeing that Canada’s prostitution laws are “unacceptable,” but unable to agree about how to change them. The majority report held that consenting adult prostitution should be legal, while the minority report held that it should be prohibited. In 2007 the Standing Committee on the Status of Women recom- mended that Canada adopt the Nordic model of demand-side prohibition.
    [Show full text]
  • Factum of the Respondent, the Attorney General of Canada
    07-CV-329807PD1 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: TERRI JEAN BEDFORD, AMY LEBOVITCH, VALERIE SCOTT Applicants and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA Respondent and ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO Intervener FACTUM OF THE RESPONDENT, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA September 2, 2009 Department of Justice Ontario Regional Office The Exchange Tower 130 King Street West, Suite 3400 Toronto, Ontario M5X 1K6 Per: Michael H. Morris Gail Sinclair Julie Jai Roy Lee Tel: (416) 973-9704 / (416) 954-8109 (416) 973-2310 / (416) 952-2946 Fax: (416) 952-4518 Email: [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Solicitor for the Respondent TO: Registrar Superior Court of Justice for Ontario 393 University Avenue 10th Floor Toronto, ON M5G 1E6 AND TO: Alan Young Osgoode Hall Law School York University 4700 Keele Street North York M3J 1P3 Counsel for the Applicant AND TO: STACEY NICHOLS Neuberger Rose LLP 1392 Eglinton Avenue West Toronto, ON M6C 3E4 Tel: 416-364-3111 Fax: 416-364-3271 Email: [email protected] Solicitor for the Applicant, Valerie Scott AND TO RON MARZEL Barrister & Solicitor 1170 Sheppard Ave West, Unit 10 Toronto, ON M3K 2A3 Tel: 416-485-5800 Fax: 416-485-1610 Solicitor for the Applicant, Amy Lebovitch AND TO: MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 20 Bay Street, 10th Floor Toronto, ON M5G 2K1 Per: Christine Bartlett-Hughes/Shelley Hallett Tel: 416-326-4639 Fax: 416-326-4656 Solicitor for the Intervener, Attorney General of Ontario i TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I – STATEMENT OF FACTS...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • COURT of APPEAL for ONTARIO CATZMAN, CHARRON And
    DATE: 20000731 DOCKET: C28066 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CATZMAN, CHARRON and ROSENBERG JJ.A. B E T W E E N : ) ) Alan Young and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ) Paul Burstein, ) for the appellant Respondent ) ) - and - ) Morris Pistyner and ) Kevin Wilson, CHRISTOPHER CLAY ) for the respondent ) Applicant/ ) Appellant ) ) Heard: October 6, 7 and 8, 1999 ) On appeal from his conviction by Mr. Justice J. F. McCart, sitting without a jury, on August 14, 1997 ROSENBERG J.A.: [1] This is one of two appeals heard by this court concerning the constitutionality of the marihuana prohibition in the former Narcotic Control Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. N-1 and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19.1 The Crown appeal in R. v. Parker concerns the medical use of marihuana. This appeal centres primarily on the use of the criminal law power to penalize the possession of marihuana. [2] The appellant owned a store called “The Great Canadian Hemporium”. In addition to selling items such as hemp products, marihuana logos and pipes, the appellant sold small marihuana plant seedlings from his store. The appellant is an active advocate for the decriminalization of marihuana. The appellant does not require marihuana for any 1 In 1997, the Narcotic Control Act was repealed by the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c. 19. Page: 2 personal medical reason although he did sell marihuana cuttings from his store to persons who did. [3] An undercover police officer bought a small marihuana cutting at the store. The police also seized marihuana cuttings and a small amount of marihuana when they executed search warrants at the appellant’s store and home.
    [Show full text]
  • Street Checks and Canadian Youth: a Critical Legal Analysis
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Saskatchewan's Research Archive STREET CHECKS AND CANADIAN YOUTH: A CRITICAL LEGAL ANALYSIS A Thesis Submitted to the College of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Master of Laws In the College of Law University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon By CHRISTINA ABBOTT © Copyright Christina Marion Abbott, September 2017. All rights reserved. Permission to Use In presenting this thesis/dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Postgraduate degree from the University of Saskatchewan, I agree that the Libraries of this University may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying of this thesis/dissertation in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor or professors who supervised my thesis/dissertation work or, in their absence, by the Head of the Department or the Dean of the College in which my thesis work was done. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis/dissertation or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the University of Saskatchewan in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis/dissertation. Requests for permission to copy or to make other uses of materials in this thesis/dissertation in whole or part should be
    [Show full text]
  • Factum of the Interveners — Bedford V. Canada
    Court File No: 34788 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO) B E T W E E N: ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO Appellants (Respondents on Cross-Appeal) - and - TERRI JEAN BEDFORD, AMY LEBOVITCH and VALERIE SCOTT Respondents (Appellants on Cross-Appeal) - and - ATTORNEY GENERAL OF QUEBEC ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Interveners FACTUM OF THE INTERVENERS CANADIAN HIV/AIDS LEGAL NETWORK, BRITISH COLUMBIA CENTRE FOR EXCELLENCE IN HIV/AIDS and HIV & AIDS LEGAL CLINIC ONTARIO (Pursuant to Rules 37 and 42 the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada ) Jonathan Shime Marie-France Major Megan Schwartzentruber Supreme Advocacy LLP Cooper Sandler Shime & Bergman LLP 397 Gladstone Ave, Suite 100 439 University Avenue, Suite 1900 Ottawa, Ontario K2P 0Y9 Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Y8 T: 613-695-8855 T: 416-585-9191 F: 613-695-8580 F: 416-408-2372 e-mail: [email protected] e-mail: [email protected] Agent for the interveners, Renée Lang Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, Ryan Peck British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario HIV/AIDS and HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic 65 Wellesley Street East, Suite 400 Ontario Toronto, Ontario M4Y 1G7 T: 416-340-7790 F: 416-340-7248 e-mail: [email protected] Richard Elliott Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network 1240 Bay Street, Suite 600 Toronto, Ontario M5R 2A7 T: 416-595-1666 F: 416-595-0094 e-mail: [email protected] Counsel for the interveners, Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, British Columbia Centre for Excellence in HIV/AIDS and HIV & AIDS Legal Clinic Ontario ORIGINAL TO: THE REGISTRAR OF THIS COURT COPIES TO: Michael H.
    [Show full text]
  • Medical Marijuana
    MEDICAL MARIJUANA DATE: 20020117 DOCKET:C34280 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO LASKIN, ROSENBERG AND MACPHERSON JJ.A. B E T W E E N: ) ) Alan Young, Louis Sokolov and Laurel Baig, for the appellant JAMES WAKEFORD ) ) Appellant ) ) - and - ) ) HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ) Roslyn J. Levine Q.C. and (IN THE RIGHT OF CANADA) ) Lara M. Speirs, for the respondent ) Respondent ) ) ) HEARD: March 2, 2001 ) Additional written submissions: ) November 5, 2001 On appeal from the judgment of Justice Blenus Wright dated May 1, 2000. ROSENBERG and MACPHERSON JJ.A.: [1] The appellant suffers from AIDS and requires marihuana for medicinal purposes to combat wasting syndrome and chemotherapy-induced nausea. For years, the appellant has fought for the right to possess marihuana legally. He believes that officials in the federal Ministry of Health have not been sufficiently attentive to his need for this medication. After an application to LaForme J., which resulted in an order for a temporary constitutional exemption from the operation of the possession and cultivation provisions of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Minister of Health gave the appellant an exemption under s. 56 of the Act. The appellant is not satisfied with this exemption. He believes it is too narrow because it does not exempt his caregivers from liability. He also believes that the federal government has a duty to make medicinal marihuana available to him, and other very sick people, and that the government is dragging its feet. [2] Accordingly, the appellant applied to the Superior Court of Justice for a declaration that his rights under s.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Proceedings Available to Individuals Before the Highest Courts: a Comparative Law Perspective
    Legal Proceedings available to Individuals before the Highest Courts: A Comparative Law Perspective Canada STUDY EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Comparative Law Library Unit October 2017 - PE 608.733 LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AVAILABLE TO INDIVIDUALS BEFORE THE HIGHEST COURTS: A COMPARATIVE LAW PERSPECTIVE Canada STUDY October 2017 Abstract This study is part of a wider project seeking to investigate, from a comparative law perspective, judicial proceedings available to individuals before the highest courts of different states, and before certain international courts. The aim of this study is to examine the various judicial proceedings available to individuals in Canadian law, and in particular before the Supreme Court of Canada. To this end, the text is divided into five parts. The introduction provides an overview of Canadian constitutional history, which explains the coexistence of rights derived from several legal traditions. It then introduces the federal system, the origins of constitutional review, as well as the court structure (I). As Canada practises a ‘diffuse’ (or ‘decentralized’) constitutional review process, the second part deals with the different types of proceedings available to individuals in matters of constitutional justice before both administrative and judicial courts, while highlighting proceedings available before the Supreme Court of Canada (II). This is followed by an examination of the constitutional and legal sources of individual — and in some cases collective — rights (III), as well as the means developed by the judiciary, the legislative, and the executive branches to ensure the effective judicial protection of rights (IV). The conclusion assesses the effectiveness of proceedings available to individuals in matters of ‘constitutional justice’.
    [Show full text]
  • Summer Law Institute
    PROGRAM 2011 OJEN SUMMER Tuesday, August 30 LAW & Wednesday, August 31 INSTITUTE Osgoode Hall, 130 Queen St. West, Toronto A CIVIL SOCIETY THROUGH EDUCATION AND DIALOGUE TUESDAY, AUGUST 30 830AM REGISTRATION AND COFFEE Convocation Hall, Osgoode Hall, 2nd Floor 9AM-10AM THE IMPAct of Justice EDucAtion Chief Justice Annemarie Bonkalo, Ontario Court of Justice; Honourable Patrick LeSage; Justice Andromache Karakatsanis, Court of Appeal for Ontario; Eliott Behar, Crown Counsel, Ministry of the Attorney General 10AM-11AM KEYnote ADDress on CIVIL LiBerties Alan Borovoy, General Counsel, Emeritus, Canadian Civil Liberties Association 11AM-1115AM BreAK 1115AM-1215PM Justice THrougH AnisHinAWBAY EDucAtion: Getting REAL WitH INDIAns in THE CLAssrooM Dawnis Kennedy 1215PM-1PM LuncH 1PM-230PM EXAMining THE ConstitutionAL CHALLenge to CANADA’S Prostitution LAWS: BEDFORD V. CANADA Alan Young, Professor, Osgoode Hall Law School; Sandra Nishikawa, Counsel, Department of Justice Canada 230PM-3PM BreAK 3PM-5PM BAIL HeArings UNDer THE YoutH CriMinAL Justice Act Ontario Court of Justice, Old City Hall, Courtroom 124 Justice Mavin Wong, Ontario Court of Justice – Metro East Toronto Court; Beverley Olesko, Assistant Crown Attorney, Ministry of the Attorney General; John Erickson, Defence Counsel; Lucas Andersen, Student, Claude Watson School for the Arts; Allison Dellandrea, Ministry of the Attorney General; Detective Constable Sandra Arruda, Toronto Police Service 5PM-730PM PresentAtion of HuX-KiteLEY EXEMPLARY Justice EDucAtor AWARD to PAT NOBLE Upper and
    [Show full text]
  • RDO 44.3 Int.Indd
    467 Equality & Incrementalism: The Role of Common Law Reasoning in Constitutional Rights Cases JULA HUGHES, VANESSA MACDONNELL AND KAREN PEARLSTON* It has been argued that the Charter of Rights and Free- Certains ont soutenu que la Charte canadiennes des droits doms ushered in a progressive new era in Canadian law. et libertés marquait l’avè ne ment d’une nouvelle ère This argument usually implies that the common law progressiste dans le droit canadien. Selon cet argu- remains a largely conser vative or stabilizing force in ment, on pourrait en déduire que la common law Canadian law, and that principled change under the demeure dans une large mesure une force conser- Charter holds more promise than the incrementalism of vatrice ou, du moins, stabilisante en droit canadien, the common law method. But progressives may also et que des changements fondés sur des principes de la be concerned that principled consti tutional change Charte semblent plus prometteurs que la méthode de carries its share of risks, inclu ding the risk that rapid, l’évolution graduelle propre à la common law, égale- large-scale consti tutional change could be met with ment connue sous le nom de « incrémentalisme ». backlash from government and from citizens, and that Toutefois, les progressistes peuvent également crain- the interests sought to be advanced through constitu- dre qu’un changement constitutionnel fondé sur des tional litigation might ultimately be worse off. In this principes comporte sa part de risques, notamment paper we argue that courts may at times be justified celui qu’un changement constitutionnel rapide et à in adopting an incre mental approach to constitutional grande échelle subisse un contrecoup de la part du cases, but only if that approach is infused with the gouvernement et des citoyens et que les intérêts que Charter value of substantive equality.
    [Show full text]
  • Cannabis : Our Position for a Canadian Public Policy
    Senate Sénat CANADA CANNABIS : OUR POSITION FOR A CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY REPORT OF THE SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ILLEGAL DRUGS VOLUME II : PART III CHAIRMAN DEPUTY CHAIRMAN PIERRE CLAUDE NOLIN COLIN KENNY SEPTEMBER 2002 REPORT OF THE SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ILLEGAL DRUGS: CANNABIS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 PART I - GENERAL ORIENTATION 5 CHAPTER 1 - OUR MANDATE 7 WORDING 7 ORIGINS 9 INTERPRETATION 10 CHAPTER 2 - OUR WORK 13 TWO WORKING PRINCIPLES 14 STATE OF KNOWLEDGE 15 Research Program 18 Expert Witnesses 19 The Challenge of Synthesis 21 TAKING OPINIONS INTO ACCOUNT 22 INTERPRETING IN LIGHT OF PRINCIPLES 23 CHAPTER 3 - OUR GUIDING PRINCIPLES 25 ETHICS, OR THE PRINCIPLE OF RECIPROCAL AUTONOMY 28 GOVERNANCE: MAXIMIZING THE ACTIONS OF INDIVIDUALS 32 Collective governance 34 Governance of the self 35 The role of governance 37 CRIMINAL LAW AND THE LIMITS OF PROHIBITION 38 Requirement for distinctions 38 Criteria for distinction 40 Application to illegal drugs issues 44 SCIENCE OR APPROXIMATE KNOWLEDGE 45 CONCLUSIONS 49 CHAPTER 4 - A CHANGING CONTEXT 51 CHANGES IN THE INTERNATIONAL SPHERE 51 Globalization and Integration 51 Difficulties of the Security Debate 55 From Anti-Drug Policies to Drug Policies 57 CHANGES IN CANADA 58 Judicial Activism 58 A National Crime Prevention Strategy 59 The Fight Against Organized Crime 59 A SOCIETAL DEBATE 60 - i - REPORT OF THE SENATE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON ILLEGAL DRUGS: CANNABIS PART II - CANNABIS: EFFECTS, TYPES OF USE, ATTITUDES 63 CHAPTER 5 - CANNABIS : FROM PLANT TO JOINT 65 ONE PLANT, VARIOUS
    [Show full text]
  • The Decline of Prohibition: Human Rights and the Medicalization of Cannabis in the Contemporary West
    The Decline of Prohibition: Human Rights and the Medicalization of Cannabis in the Contemporary West By Matthew DeCloedt LL.M. in Human Rights Long Thesis PROFESSOR: Julia Buxton Central European University 1051 Budapest, Nador utca 9. Hungary CEU eTD Collection © Central European University June 22, 2018 Table of Contents Outline 2 Chapter 1 - From Prohibition to Medicalization to Legalization (And Places in Between) 2 Chapter 2 - Juridical Science and the Science of Psychoactive Substances 3 Chapter 3 - The Liberty Interest v. Prohibition 5 Introduction Prohibition, Human Rights, and Cannabis Use 7 Introduction 7 Jurisdictions 9 Previous Scholarship 10 The Gap 10 Chapter 1 From Prohibition to Medicalization to Legalization (And Places in Between) 12 Instruments of the Modern International Drugs Prohibition Regime 12 Domestic Political Contexts 16 Canada 16 USA 20 UK 30 Chapter 2 Juridical Science and the Science of Psychoactive Substances 35 Context: The Politics of Addiction 36 Canada: Science and the Harm Paradigm 37 USA: Science and the Harm Paradigm 43 UK: Science and the Harm Paradigm 51 In Sum 56 Chapter 3 The Liberty Interest v. Prohibition 57 The Harm Paradigm 57 Medical Cannabis and Liberty in Canada 59 Discrimination and Pot as “Lifestyle Choice” in Canada 68 UK 70 US and Liberty 77 Drugs Policy 88 Canada 88 USA and the War on Drugs 91 UK Policy 93 Conclusion Cannabis and the Future of Psychoactive Substances 94 REFERENCES 102 LEGISLATION 102 CASE LAW 102 CANADA 102 CEU eTD Collection UK 102 USA 103 SECONDARY SOURCES 103 1 Outline Chapter 1 - From Prohibition to Medicalization to Legalization (And Places in Between) This chapter surveys the history of international cannabis prohibition, its implementation, and reception in Canada, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom.
    [Show full text]