2 total
Proposed federal Securities Act is unconstitutional as it exceeds Parliament's general trade and commerce power.
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.
SCC clarifies the three-stage rationality test for government departures from judicial compensation commission recommendations.
The Supreme Court of Canada heard multiple appeals from New Brunswick, Ontario, Alberta, and Quebec regarding the constitutional requirement for independent judicial compensation commissions.
The Court clarified the principles from the Provincial Judges Reference, establishing a three-stage analysis for determining whether a government's response to a commission's recommendations meets the standard of rationality.
The Court upheld the government responses in New Brunswick and Ontario, found the Alberta government's response partially irrational but globally effective, and struck down the Quebec government's response for failing to address the committee's core recommendations.