D. STATE - Access to Services

 

Leading Cases

 

Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 624

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1997/1997scc89.html

The fact that the legislation did not provide funding for interpreters in hospitals did not violate s.15(1).  Rather, it was the fact that hospital directors did not use their discretion to fund the interpreters that violated s.15(1).

 

Eaton v. Brant County Board of Education, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 241

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1997/1997scc13.html

A disabled child was placed in special education classes against the wishes of her parents.  The Supreme Court of Canada held that the decision to place her in special classes did not constitute the imposition of a burden or disadvantage and it did not constitute the withholding of a benefit or advantage.  It was a decision that was made in the best interests of the child using a child centered analysis. 

 

Auton (Guardian ad litem of) v. British Columbia (Attorney General) 2000 BCSC 1142, Supreme Court of British Columbia

http://www.canlii.org/bc/cas/bcsc/2000/2000bcsc1142.html

Government failure to fund autism treatment violated s.15(1).

 

Auton (Guardian ad litem of) v. British Columbia (Attorney General) 2004 SCC 78, Supreme Court of Canada

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/2004/2004scc78.html

Government failure to fund autism treatment does not violate s.15(1).  The claimant group was not denied a benefit that was otherwise available to a comparator group.  The Canadian health care system is not intended to cover all health programs and costs.  Autism programs are not funded because they are not considered to be a core health program.  The lack of funding is not based on discrimination. 

 

R. v. Demers [2003] B.C.J. No. 75, Court of Appeal for British Columbia

http://www.canlii.ca/bc/cas/bcca/2003/2003bcca28.html

Prohibition on picketing outside of abortion clinics violates freedom of expression but is saved under s.1 of the Charter.

 

Chaoulli v. Quebec (Attorney General), [2005] 1 S.C.R. 791

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/2005/2005scc35.html

Banning patients from using private health insurance is unconstitutional under the Quebec Charter of Rights.

 

 

 

 

 

 

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).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D. STATE - Economic Rights

 

Community Perspectives

 

DAWN Ontario: Remembering Kimberly Rogers

http://dawn.thot.net/Kimberly_Rogers/

Kimberly Rogers committed suicide while under house arrest for welfare fraud.  This site provides links to recommendations made after the inquest into her death and critics of the current state of social assistance in Ontario.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D. STATE - Legal Aid

 

Leading Cases

 

New Brunswick (Minister of Health and Community Services) v. G. (J.), [1999] 3 S.C.R. 46

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1999/1999scc49.html

The state has an obligation to provide state-funded legal aid to parents who could lose custody of their children during court proceedings. 

 

British Columbia (Minister of Forests) v. Okanagan Indian Band, [2003] 3 S.C.R. 371

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/2003/2003scc71.html

When a party is unable to afford the cost of constitutional litigation the Court has power to order the government to cover the party’s litigation costs even before the issue goes to court.

 

Broomer v. Ontario (Attorney General), (2004), 187 O.A.C. 192

http://www.canlii.org/on/cas/onscdc/2004/2004onscdc11415.html

Broomer started constitutional litigation against the government.  Midway through the trial the issue was settled when the government changed the legislation that was being challenged.  Despite the fact that Broomer did not win his case the Court still ordered the government to pay him costs.

 

Canadian Bar Association: Legal Aid Test Case

http://www.cba.org/cba/advocacy/legalaid/default.aspx

The Canadian Bar Association has officially launched a ground-breaking test case to establish a constitutional right to civil legal aid in British Columbia.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D. STATE – Legal Aid

 

Academic Perspectives

 

 

Canadian Bar Association: Legal Aid

http://www.cba.org/cba/newsletters/crim-2002/c15.aspx

This site provides background information on legal aid in Canada.