Articles 2022

The author explains why, in his view, Canada is overdue for a robust public debate about the circumstances in which using the notwithstanding clause is legitimate.

Exploring the decision in Gladue and its applicability to Section 7 of the Charter.

Discussing the recent and forthcoming measures on modern slavery in Canada, including: the impact of the Canadian-United States-Mexico Agreement (“CUSMA”); Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s mandate letter to Canada’s Minister of Labour; and the development and status of Canada’s modern slavery legislation.

The 20th Annual Charter of Rights and Freedoms Conference hosted by the Constitutional Civil Liberties and Human Rights (“CCLHR”) Section of the Ontario Bar Association (“OBA”) took place on October 5, 2021 via webcast. This article summarizes the Conference’s Year in Review presentation, the four panel discussions, and the Keynote Address.

In the context of third-party political advertising restrictions, Melanie Zetusian provides an in-depth analysis of the ONSC decision in Working Families Ontario v. Ontario, where the Applicants challenged the constitutionality of the amendments made by the Ontario legislature via the Protecting Ontario Elections Act, 2021.

In the context of Canada's snap Federal Election, this opinion piece by Professor Mendes proposes democratic constraints on the use of the notwithstanding provisions in Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom.

A Welcome Message from Andrew Sprague, the chair of the Constitutional, Civil Liberties and Human Rights (CCLHR) Law Section of the OBA. An insightful message which details his passion for the CCLHR, the goals of the CCLHR Executive Team and a detailed account of upcoming events and initiatives in the 2021-2022 season.

The recent Order, which imposed a hotel quarantine requirement for travellers returning to Canada by air, has been tested in two recent decisions. The Superior Court of Justice and Federal Court of Canada each considered the constitutionality of the new measures to prevent the spread of Covid-19: Canadian Constitution Foundation v Canada (AG) (“CCF”), and Spencer v Canada (AG) (“Spencer”). Injunctive relief was refused in both decisions. This note summarizes and compares CCF and Spencer.

Despite evictions moratoria and the earlier suspension of LTB proceedings, observers have noted a sharp rise of homelessness and the proliferation of encampments in parks since the pandemic began. This article outlines some of the changes and issues that Bill 184 has had on the eviction process at the LTB, and in particular, the effect it has had on racialized and marginalized communities in the City of Toronto.

In its December 23, 2020 decision in Hudson’s Bay Company ULC v. Ontario (Attorney General), the Ontario Divisional Court dismissed Hudson’s Bay Company’s bid to ease retail lockdowns in regions of Ontario hardest hit by the COVID-19 pandemic. This decision signals a lingering post-Vavilov doubt about how closely courts will examine the legality of regulations, and also illustrates the courts’ deferential approach to government restrictions on civil liberties during the pandemic.