Lecture 6 2010 - Equality Rights S. 15: (1) Every...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Equality Rights • S. 15: (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability . (1985) • Formal equality: treat likes Substantive equality : an approach that recognizes patterns of disadvantage and oppression exist in society and requires that law makers and government officials take this into account in their actions. Andrews (1989) – impugned: Law Soc of BC regulation requiring lawyers to be citizens. – Mark Andrews: UK citizen, took law in UK, married a Canadian, wanted to practice in BC. Had to wait 3 yrs for citizenship. Claimed reg. violated S. 15. – Andrews lost at trial, won in BC CA and SCC. – McIntyre wrote opinion re how Ct would interpret s. 15:
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Andrews (cont’d) Formal equality approach rejected. – Problem with formal equality is that it might justify differential treatment on account of race. – Broader dn of equality in Charter a signal to adopt a more substantive approach to equality: “all … are recognized at law as human beings equally deserving of concern, respect and consideration.” – Many laws distinguish, some legitimately. S. 15 prohibits discrimination , which is a distinction that imposes burdens, obligations, or disadvantages on an individual or group, or withholds benefits available to others, based on personal characteristics rather than merit or capacity. Prohibited personal characteristics include the enumerated grounds in S. 15 (race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability) or analogous grounds. Approach recommended by LEAF.
Background image of page 2
Andrews (3) Once “discrimination” established, it’s up to govt wishing to “discriminate” to justify under s.1. Is there discrimination against Andrews? All agree yes, because citizenship is analogous to national origin, and a burden is placed on non-citizens who want to be lawyers Can it be justified under s. 1? – Majority (Dickson, Wilson, L’Heureux-Dube, La Forest) No. – Objective of citizenship requirement: ensure lawyers have knowledge of Can govt and commitment to it. Passes Part I of Oakes, but not rational connection test. Many citizens don’t have much knowledge of Can govt. – McIntyre & Lamer dissented: this is a limit which is reasonable for the legislature to impose; courts should not second-guess legislature too closely.
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Turpin (1989) Impugned: section of Crim Code that allows those charged with murder in Alberta to opt for trial by judge alone, where in other provinces accused must be tried by judge and jury.
Background image of page 4
Image of page 5
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/14/2012 for the course POLS 3136 taught by Professor Bazowski during the Winter '10 term at York University.

Page1 / 25

Lecture 6 2010 - Equality Rights S. 15: (1) Every...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 5. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online