Eugene B. Szach

The Governor in Council referred the proposed federal Securities Act to the Supreme Court of Canada to determine its constitutional validity.

The proposed Act sought to create a single national securities regulator and a comprehensive federal regime for securities regulation.

The federal government argued the Act was a valid exercise of its general trade and commerce power under s. 91(2) of the Constitution Act, 1867.

The Court applied the General Motors test and concluded that while certain aspects of the securities market are national in scope, the main thrust of the Act was the day-to-day regulation of securities, which falls under provincial jurisdiction over property and civil rights (s. 92(13)).

Consequently, the Court found the proposed Act unconstitutional, though it noted that a cooperative federal-provincial approach remains available.

The Supreme Court of Canada considered whether police officers can ask drivers about prior alcohol consumption and request roadside sobriety tests without first informing them of their right to counsel under s. 10(b) of the Charter.

The Court held that while such police actions do infringe the right to counsel, the infringement is a reasonable limit prescribed by law and demonstrably justified under s. 1 of the Charter.

The limit arises by necessary implication from the operating requirements of provincial highway traffic legislation and the Criminal Code.

The evidence obtained was admissible, and the orders for new trials for both accused were upheld.

The Supreme Court of Canada considered whether police officers can ask drivers about prior alcohol consumption and request roadside sobriety tests without first informing them of their right to counsel under s. 10(b) of the Charter.

The Court held that while such police actions do infringe the right to counsel, the infringement is a reasonable limit prescribed by law and demonstrably justified under s. 1 of the Charter.

The limit arises by necessary implication from the operating requirements of provincial highway traffic legislation and the Criminal Code.

The evidence obtained was admissible, and the orders for new trials for both accused were upheld.