Law v. Canada involved a challenge of the formula by which survivor’s benefits are granted under the Canada Pension Plan. Nancy Law claimed these benefits at age 30, after the death of her husband who had contributed to the Canada Pension Plan for a period of 22 years. Law argued that the provisions of the Canada Pension Plan that limited access to survivor’s benefits on the basis of age were a violation of her equality rights under Section 15(1) of the Charter. Continue reading
Law v. Canada (Min. of Employment and Immigration), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 497
Filed under Section 15: Equality Rights
Vriend v. Alberta, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 493
Often described as a high-water mark of judicial activism in Canada, the Vriend case involved an allegation that Alberta’s provincial human rights legislation was too narrow, and therefore inconsistent with the Charter. Continue reading
Filed under Section 15: Equality Rights
R. v. Caslake, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 51
The accused, Terence Lawrence Caslake, was lawfully arrested for possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. Several hours later, an RCMP officer conducted an inventory search of Mr. Caslake’s vehicle, without obtaining a warrant, and discovered some cash along with two packages of cocaine. Continue reading
R. v. Belnavis, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 341
The police stopped a car for speeding. When the driver could not produce adequate documentation, they proceeded to search the car, and located a number of garbage bags containing new clothing with price tags attached. As a result of this discovery, both the driver and passenger in the car were charged with possession of stolen property. Both accused argued that the search of the vehicle was unreasonable, and that their Section 8 rights had been violated as a result. Continue reading
R. v. Feeney, [1997] 2 S.C.R. 13
In R. v. Feeney, the Supreme Court of Canada overturned the Michael Feeney’s conviction for second degree murder on the basis that the police had unlawfully entered his home without a warrant, and obtained evidence from him without informing him of his right to counsel. Continue reading
R. v. Stillman, [1997] 1 SCR 607
The 17-year-old accused, William Wayne Dale Stillman, was suspected of first degree murder. His alleged victim was found with semen in her vagina, a human bite mark on her body, and blows to her head which resulted in her death. After Mr. Stillman was taken into custody, his lawyers indicated that he was not willing to give a statement or consent to the taking of any hair samples or other bodily evidence. Continue reading
R. v. Edwards, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 128
Police suspected the accused, Calhoun Edwards, of dealing drugs out of his car and believed that he stored drugs at his girlfriend’s apartment. When Edwards was arrested for driving while his license was suspended, the arresting officers witnessed him swallowing an object. He was taken into custody while police pursued a drug investigation. Continue reading
Filed under Section 8: Search & Seizure
R. v. Heywood, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 761
The accused, Robert Lorne Heywood, an individual with a previous conviction for sexual assault, was charged under Section 179(1)(b) of the Criminal Code with “loitering at or near a school ground, playground, public park or bathing area.” Mr. Heywood argued that the section infringed his rights under Section 7 of the Charter and overstepped its legislative intention, namely the protection of children from sexual predators. Continue reading
R. v. Bartle, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 173
R. v. Bartle established a positive duty on the part of police officers to provide detained persons with an opportunity to exercise their right to retain and instruct counsel. In this case, police officers informed Mr. Bartle of his right to counsel when they took him into custody for suspected impaired driving, but failed to advise him of a toll-free number that he could call to speak with a duty counsel lawyer. Continue reading
R. v. Plant, [1993] 3 S.C.R. 281
Police in Calgary received an anonymous tip that marijuana was being grown on a specific city block. As a result of this tip, a police officer accessed the electrical utility’s computer system and discovered that a particular house on the block was using more than four times as much electricity as its neighbours. Two officers then performed a warrantless perimeter search of the property and observed that the basement windows were covered with something opaque and a that a vent had been blocked using a plastic bag. Continue reading
Filed under Section 8: Search & Seizure