D. STATE - Economic Rights

Leading Cases

Gosselin v. Quebec (Attorney General) 2002 SCC 84, Supreme Court of Canada

http://www.canlii.ca/ca/cas/scc/2002/2002scc84.html

Quebec had a welfare structure that provided less financial assistance to an individual is they were under the age of 30. The Supreme Court found that the purpose of the welfare legislation was to improve the situation of those that it affected. As a result it did not violate section 15(1). Nor does it violate section 7 of the Charter because section 7 does not place positive obligations on the state to ensure that citizens receive an adequate standard of living.

Falkiner v. Ontario [2002] O.J. No. 1771, Court of Appeal for Ontario

http://www.canlii.org/on/cas/onca/2002/2002onca10233.html

If a welfare recipient was cohabitating with someone of the opposite sex they were considered to be in a spousal relationship which in turn affected their welfare entitlements. This legislation was found to violate s.15(1).

Canada ( Attorney General ) v. Lesiuk ( C.A. ), [2003] 2 F.C. 697

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/fca/2003/2003fca3.html

Kelly Lesiuk was denied Employment Insurance benefits because, as a mother working part-time, she was unable to accumulate the number of work hours necessary to qualify. The Court held that the requirement did not violate her section 15(1) rights.

Miller v. Canada (Attorney General), 2002 FCA 370

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/fca/2002/2002fca370.html

Regular employment insurance benefits are reduced for those who have received maternity, parental, or disability benefits. The Federal Court held that this does not violate section 15(1).