Cases on ExcellentWiki - Legal Encyclopedia

Canada (AG) v. Bedford [2013] — Prostitution Law

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, [2013] 3 SCR 1101, is a landmark constitutional decision in which the Supreme Court of Canada struck down three Criminal Code provisions regulating prostitution. The case is significant for its articulation of the principles of arbitrariness, overbreadth, and gross disproportionality under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and for its willingness to overturn a relatively recent precedent.

Facts

Terri Jean Bedford, Amy Lebovitch, and Valerie Scott — three current or former sex workers — challenged the constitutionality of three Criminal Code provisions:

Canada (AG) v. Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Society [2012] — Public Interest Standing

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

Canada (Attorney General) v. Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Society, [2012] 2 SCR 524, is the Supreme Court of Canada’s leading modern decision on public interest standing. The Court established a flexible, holistic three-factor test for determining whether a public interest litigant should be granted standing to bring a legal challenge despite lacking a direct personal interest in the subject matter.

Facts

The Downtown Eastside Sex Workers United Against Violence Society (SWUAV) and a former sex worker, Sheryl Kiselbach, brought a constitutional challenge to several Criminal Code provisions regulating prostitution — the same provisions later challenged in Canada (AG) v. Bedford, [2013] 3 SCR 1101.

Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov [2019] — Administrative Law

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, [2019] 4 SCR 653, is the Supreme Court of Canada’s most significant administrative law decision since Dunsmuir v. New Brunswick, [2008] 1 SCR 190. The Court restructured the standard of review framework, establishing a presumption of reasonableness for judicial review of administrative decisions and providing a revised methodology for conducting reasonableness review.

Facts

Alexander Vavilov was born in Canada in 1994. His parents, both Russian intelligence officers operating undercover, had their identities exposed after the end of the Cold War. They returned to Russia in 1998 without Vavilov, who remained in Canada with relatives.

Carter v. Canada (AG) [2015] — Medical Assistance in Dying

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

Carter v. Canada (Attorney General), [2015] 1 SCR 331, is a landmark constitutional decision in which the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the Criminal Code prohibition on medical assistance in dying (MAiD). The unanimous Court held that the absolute prohibition on physician-assisted death violated the right to life, liberty, and security of the person under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Facts

The case was brought by three individuals:

R v. Keegstra [1990] — Hate Speech and Freedom of Expression

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

R v. Keegstra, [1990] 3 SCR 697, is the Supreme Court of Canada’s leading decision on the constitutionality of hate speech laws. The case upheld section 319(2) of the Criminal Code, which prohibits the wilful promotion of hatred against identifiable groups, as a reasonable limit on freedom of expression under section 1 of the Charter. The decision established Canada’s distinctive approach to hate speech regulation, sharply contrasting with the near-absolute protection of hate speech under the US First Amendment.

R v. Morgentaler [1988] — Abortion and the Charter

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

R v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 SCR 30, is one of the most significant decisions in Canadian constitutional history. The Supreme Court of Canada struck down section 251 of the Criminal Code, which had criminalized abortion except where approved by a therapeutic abortion committee at an accredited hospital. The decision, rendered in fractured reasons from seven judges, established that criminal restrictions on abortion violate a woman’s right to security of the person under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

R v. Oakes [1986] — Canada's Landmark Proportionality Case

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

R v. Oakes, [1986] 1 SCR 103, is the foundational decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the interpretation of section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The case established the Oakes test, a structured proportionality framework for determining whether a limit on a Charter right is demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. The case remains the most cited Canadian constitutional decision and has influenced proportionality analysis worldwide.

Tsilhqot'in Nation v. British Columbia [2014] — Aboriginal Title

Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000

Introduction

Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia, [2014] 2 SCR 256, is a historic decision in which the Supreme Court of Canada granted the first declaration of Aboriginal title in Canadian history to a First Nation outside of a treaty process. The case fundamentally clarified the test for proving Aboriginal title, the nature of Aboriginal title as a property right, and the limits on government action affecting Aboriginal title lands.

Facts

The Tsilhqot’in Nation, a group of six bands in the Chilcotin region of British Columbia, claimed Aboriginal title to approximately 1,900 square kilometres of their traditional territory. The claim area had been used by the Tsilhqot’in for thousands of years, and the Tsilhqot’in had never signed a treaty with the Crown.