law unit 2

Question 1

define reduction theory

Answer 1

person is free to do what is not positively prohibited by the law

Question 2

define Ontario Human Rights Commission

administrative

Answer 2

an administrative of at least 7 persons that enforce the Ontario Human Rights Code and promote dignity and equality

Question 3

define board of inquiry

Answer 3

holds a hearing to see if a violation took place and what should take place

Question 4

define similarly situated test

Answer 4

applies to those who are similarly situated and to be treated equally

Question 5

define discrimination

Answer 5

the act of treating a group or individual differently not based on relevant differences

Question 6

define terminal action

Answer 6

a general recongition to treat a group or indivdauls more favorbly

Question 7

define reverse discrimination

Answer 7

discrimination against the majority

Question 8

define bill 178

Answer 8

restricts the use of bilingual signs in Quebec

Question 9

define equality before the law

comparing

Answer 9

equity in the administration of the law is with comparing with society and not a person of society

Question 10

define equality under the law

equal treatment

Answer 10

concerned with equal treatment in the content of the law it guarantees equal treatment with a similarly situated test in the administration of the law

Question 11

define reasonable limits clause

Answer 11

there are limits to people’s rights and freedoms so long they can be demonstratively qualified

Question 12

define parliamentary supremacy

Answer 12

parliament has the right to make or unmake laws no person has the right to change these laws the only ones who can are people we elected

Question 13

define responsible government

Answer 13

the people we elect make laws and govern us are responsible to us and what they do in parliament

Question 14

define rule of law

defending ourselves

Answer 14

our right to defend ourselves in court the judge has a right to make the decison he/she thinks is the most fair

Question 15

explain human rights pre-charter

Answer 15

1. charter of rights and freedoms
2. the judge made law or precedence
3. statutory rights
   human rights laws were changed in 1982 when the charter proclaimed itself into the constitution which means it is entrenched so not all laws can be easily taken away

Question 16

three factors of cvil liberites

Answer 16

1. the government must meet the test of validity or be done with legal authority
   2, people’s rights and freedoms are violated must seek legal damages
2. statutes that were infringed are subjected to strict examination by the courts

Question 17

what is the 1899 Sparrow vsJohnson case?

Answer 17

pre charter
a black man and woman were refused theatre seats they sued and were awarded damages not on the grounds of discrimination but on the grounds of breach of contract

Question 18

what is human legislation in Canada?

federal

Answer 18

1. as a provincial act, the human rights code can only apply to enterprises that are in the federal domain
2. The federal government is not affected by this but is subjected to the Canadian Human Rights Acts of 1976

Question 19

what does the Ontario Human Rights Commission do?

Answer 19

they will consider if the complaint is valid, and start a formal investigation to settle individuals if needed they will bring in a board of inquiry

Question 20

what are the three points of the Bill of Rights and why was this not a good bill?

Answer 20

1. it was a mear statute and not entrenched in the constitution
2. the bill was a federal statute and only applies to federal domains
3. it was inapplicable due to its narrow scope
   it does not protect Canada from the abuses of the government

Question 21

what are the human rights in the charter?

Answer 21

in 1982 Canada got its constitution and it takes precedence over both federal and provincial government

Question 22

what did Pierre Trudeau believe

Answer 22

he believed we have a right to life, liberates and property and they subside from any government authority

Question 23

what concerns were raised about the charter?

Answer 23

that the charter would transfer all legal authority from the legislatures to the judiciary making control change from elected officials to appoint juirs

Question 24

application of the charter

Answer 24

since the charter is a part of the constitution it can only be changed with the same amending formula as the constitution

Question 25

what are the limitations of the charter (notwithstanding clause)

Answer 25

this clause was used to introduce Bill 178 and individual rights are not absolute the conflict between our rights and freedoms is taken into consideration to create a qualified set of rights rather than absolute ones

Question 26

what are the limitations of the charter (reasonable limits clause)

Answer 26

when it comes to a case where someone’s rights and freedoms are violated the court should consider the application of section 1 it should be a rational way of achieving governmental objectives while interfering as little as possible

Question 27

what are equality rights according to arisotial

Answer 27

he believed we should treat equal to their degree of equality and rejected the idea of absolute equality

Question 28

1960 Canadian Bill of Rights - Christie v York Corp case details

Answer 28

a man was refused a beer for being a black man and was told they have “standards” he sued for $200 in damages and this decision was based on sections 19 and 33 of the “Quebec Licencing Act” which made it illegal to refuse service but it was appealed and argued that his case fell under the general principle of freedom which means the owner was within his rights

Question 29

Kearsley v City of St. Catherines, Ontario Human Rights Commission, April 2002 case details

Answer 29

he applied for a position to be a firefighter he had to do a medical exam, the examiner discovered that he had an irregular heartbeat and said he couldn’t be a firefighter he had consulted multiple other doctors who said he was able to. he filed a complaint with the OHRC they held a board inquiry the doctor argued that he was at an increased risk for stroke they brought an expert in that argued that he wasn’t at an increase of stroke. he won the case

Question 30

Eaton v Brant County Board of Education case details

Answer 30

emily has cerasle palsy, vision impairment and many other things per her parents’ request she was put into a normal classroom with an assistant. after 3 years her teacher said this school environment may be very harmful to her and said that she should be put into a special needs room, her parents went through 2 appeals and agrued that Emily rights were infringed on her sc 15 rights and said unless her parents consented she was staying in public school