This appeal addressed public interest standing in a broad constitutional challenge to prostitution-related Criminal Code provisions.
The Court reaffirmed that standing is determined by a flexible, purposive weighing of three factors: serious justiciable issue, genuine interest, and whether the proceeding is a reasonable and effective means to bring the claims forward.
It held that parallel or potential litigation does not automatically defeat standing and that practical barriers affecting directly impacted persons are relevant to the analysis.
In the circumstances, the respondents met the test and were granted public interest standing.
