Courtney J. Harris

Appellants sought a declaration that section 14 of the Health Insurance Act, which prohibits OHIP-eligible Ontario residents from purchasing private health insurance for OHIP-covered services, violated their Charter rights under section 7.

The appellants' OHIP coverage had been cancelled for failure to prove Ontario residency, and they claimed private insurers refused to sell them insurance citing section 14.

The application judge dismissed the application, finding the appellants were not affected by section 14 itself but rather by an alleged misinterpretation of it by private insurers.

The Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal, holding that the appellants failed to demonstrate that section 14 of the HIA, rather than a misinterpretation by non-parties, was affecting them.

The applicants, two women in a platonic relationship, sought to jointly adopt a Crown ward.

The Child, Youth and Family Services Act (and its predecessor, the Child and Family Services Act) restricted joint adoption applications to individuals who are "spouses of one another," defined as married or in a conjugal relationship.

The applicants challenged this restriction as discriminatory under section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, arguing it violated their equality rights based on marital status.

The Attorney General of Ontario intervened and conceded constitutional invalidity.

The court found the legislation created a distinction based on marital status, an analogous ground, and perpetuated prejudice and stereotyping by excluding non-spousal couples from joint adoption without merit-based assessment.

The court further found the infringement was not justified under section 1 of the Charter, as it lacked rational connection and minimal impairment, and its deleterious effects outweighed any benefits.

The court declared the words "who are spouses of one another" in the relevant sections of both Acts to be of no force and effect for public adoptions.