Unit 2 - Rights and Freedoms Flashcards
To help you understand the various cases and sections of the charter for your quiz.
SCC decision made it legal for stores to stay open on a Sunday
R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd (1985)
Created a test in order to determine the validity of a freedom of expression argument. Based on the test, the SCC decided that a Quebec law that restricted advertising directed to children was valid.
Irwin Toy Co Ltd v. Quebec (AG)
Someone can publish any information, even false information, as long as the expression is not violent, or incites violence
R. v. Zundel (1992)
Teacher was charged with a violation of establishing hate crimes within the classroom; you cannot incite hate-speech in schools
R. V. KEEGSTRA (1990)
Allows students to learn about world religions in school
LOYOLA H.S. V. QUEBEC (2015)
Established restrictions on pending money towards political parties during an election campaign by third parties.
Harper v. Canada (2004)
It gave the right to vote back to Canadians who were sentenced to jail for more than 2 years.
Sauve v. Canada (2002)
The mobility of rights of moving products/goods has to be in accordance to laws already existing. Also, corporations have the same rights as individuals to make a living.
Cdn. Egg Marketing v. Richardson (1998)
SCC decided If a person commits a crime, and its impact has an effect on another country, then that person can be extradited from Canada to the other country to face charges
U.S. V. COTRONI (1989)
This case is the first case to deal with extradition (committing a crime in another country and being sent to that country without receiving the death penalty – Can face penalties IF the individual is a not a Canadian Citizen)
Kindler v. Canada (1991)
SCC decision gave woman the right to choose to have an abortion.
R. v. Morgentaler (1988)
If you commit a crime in a country with the death penalty, you cannot receive the death penalty if you are a Canadian citizen.
U.S. V. BURNS (2001)
Decision focused on the legality of strip searches conducted by the police as part of a search incident to arrest; Police cannot conduct a strip search in public. Must be within the confines of the warrant.
R. v. Golden (2001)
SCC established a test that provides the factors to be considered in determining whether a search conducted by a teacher or principal in the school environment is reasonable.
R v. M (1998)
This cased dealt with the legality of using sniffer dogs in schools. Sniffer dogs are not allowed.
R. v. AM (2008)
Deals with the scope of police powers to enter into private dwellings without a warrant in order to protect lives.
R. v. Godoy (1999)
Cell phones can be confiscated by officers (in certain circumstances) to retrieve information about a crime
R. v. Fearon (2014)
The Court held that the police are not permitted to enter into someone’s house without a search warrant and gather evidence unless seen in plain view sight.
R. v. Feeney (1997)
Dealt with the legality of a pat-down for a search on a suspected criminal. You can only pat-down an individual for only a protective measure, not for obtaining evidence.
R. V. MANN (2004)
Deals with discrimination based on the officer and the judge’s decision. Both are not allowed to arrest or give a sentence with racially motivated cause.
R. V. BROWN (2003)
The Courts decision imposed a duty upon the police to provide information and access to a legal aid lawyer if an individual or individuals need one
R. v. Brydges (1990)
The SCC decision established reasonable time limits in a trial (18 months for provincial trials; 30 Months for superior court trials)
R. v. Askov (1990)
STILL PENDING: Court has to decide whether a judges time in making a decision should count toward the overall time it takes during a trial
R. V. K.G.K. (2019)
Established a test when determining if something is discrimination under s. 15 of the Charter; Decision provided the basis that in order to be a lawyer, you must be a Canadian citizen.
ANDREWS V. LAW SOCIETY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
establishes sexual orientation constitutes a prohibited basis of discrimination under section 15 of the charter
EGAN V. CANADA (1995)
case dealt with the right to pension (CPP) denied to a 35-year-old widow
LAW V. CANADA (1999)
This case established a test for discrimination based on sex (Qualifications for female firefighters)
B.C. VS. B.C. GOV’T SERVICES (MEIORIN CASE) (1999)
A case regarding sexual orientation in the Alberta Individual Rights Protection Act violates section 15 of the Canadian Charter; Law had to change regarding an individual being fired who was gay.
VRIEND V. ALBERTA (1998)
A decision that allowed visually or hearing-impaired to have access to equal medical benefits and services in the form of a translator during court.
ELDRIDGE V. B.C. (ATT. GEN.) (1997)
Minority French groups have the right to set up French-speaking schools
M A H E V . A L B E R T A ( 1 9 9 0 )
