The appellant province challenged lower court rulings that had invalidated a regulation requiring all driver's licence holders to be photographed, including religious objectors.
The respondents, members of a communal religious colony, asserted that the mandatory photograph requirement infringed freedom of religion because their faith prohibited willingly having photographs taken.
The majority held that the regulation infringed s. 2(a) but was justified under s. 1 because the universal photo requirement was rationally connected to maintaining the integrity of the licensing system and minimizing identity theft, minimally impaired the right, and had proportionate effects.
The Court also held that the regulation did not infringe s. 15(1) because any distinction arose from a neutral and rationally defensible policy choice rather than discriminatory stereotyping.
