The appellants were charged with counselling bingo licensees to violate the terms and conditions of their licences, contrary to the Criminal Code.
They challenged the constitutionality of the Code provisions, arguing they constituted an improper delegation of criminal law power to the provinces and created an invalid discretionary regulatory regime.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that the provisions were not an improper delegation of legislative power, but rather a valid exercise of the criminal law power that incorporated provincial legislation by reference or limited the reach of the criminal law.
The Court also found that the non-publication of the licence terms and conditions did not violate the Charter.
