The respondent, a natural father, was denied parental benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971, which provided such benefits only to adoptive parents.
The trial judge found this violated s. 15 of the Charter and used s. 24(1) to read natural parents into the legislation.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that while reading in is a permissible remedy under s. 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, it was inappropriate in this case due to the budgetary implications and the lack of a clear legislative mandate.
The Court concluded that the proper remedy was to declare the provision invalid but suspend the declaration to allow Parliament to amend the legislation.
