4 total
City's removal of anti-abortion transit ads quashed for failing to balance Charter freedom of expression.
The applicant brought applications for judicial review challenging the City of Guelph's decisions to remove three anti-abortion advertisements from its public buses.
The City had relied on rulings by Ad Standards, which found the advertisements to be misleading and demeaning to women.
The Divisional Court held that the City's decisions were unreasonable because it failed to conduct the balancing exercise required by the Doré/Loyola framework, which requires weighing the City's legislative objectives against the applicant's section 2(b) Charter right to freedom of expression.
The matter was remitted back to the City for reconsideration.
Judicial review of Canada Summer Jobs Attestation requirement dismissed; proportionate balancing of Charter rights found.
The applicants sought judicial review of the Minister's decision to require an Attestation for the 2018 Canada Summer Jobs program, which required applicants to attest that their core mandate respects individual human rights, including reproductive rights.
The right-to-life organization refused to sign and its funding application was rejected.
The Federal Court dismissed the application, finding the Attestation was intra vires the Department of Employment and Social Development Act and was not made in bad faith or with a closed mind.
While the Attestation minimally engaged freedom of religion and expression, it reflected a proportionate balancing with the statutory objective of ensuring an inclusive labour market and protecting human rights.
Application for judicial review dismissed because the student union is a private, non-governmental entity.
The applicants, members of a pro-life student group, sought judicial review of the Ryerson Students’ Union’s decision to deny their group "Student Group status." The RSU denied status based on its pro-choice, pro-feminist policies.
The court addressed whether it had jurisdiction to review the RSU's decision and whether the decision attracted Charter scrutiny.
The court found the RSU to be a private entity, not subject to administrative law principles or Charter scrutiny in this context, and dismissed the application.
Court orders municipality to post controversial transit ad on consent but declines broad constitutional declaration.
The applicant sought a declaration that the respondent municipality's refusal to post its anti-abortion advertisement on city buses violated its freedom of expression under s. 2(b) of the Charter.
The respondent consented to post the advertisement and did not appear at the hearing.
The Divisional Court found that the Charter applied and the refusal limited the applicant's freedom of expression without a reasonable balancing of statutory objectives.
However, the court declined to issue a formal constitutional declaration due to the lack of an adversarial evidentiary record, instead issuing a consent order requiring the respondent to post the advertisement.
