Roy W. Millen

The Court held that core search-and-seizure and record-keeping provisions in the anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing scheme, as applied to lawyers and law firms, unjustifiably infringed Charter protections.

It confirmed sections 62, 63, 63.1 and 64 of the Act violated section 8 in this context, and that related regulatory obligations infringed section 7 when combined with inadequate privilege safeguards.

The appeal was allowed in part: findings against sections 5(i) and 5(j) were set aside, while the remaining constitutional relief largely stood.

The appellant sought to set aside a municipal taxation bylaw as unreasonable, arguing that tax burdens should track objective service-consumption factors.

The respondent municipality argued that reasonableness in bylaw review requires consideration of broader social, economic, and demographic factors affecting the community.

The Court held that substantive review of municipal bylaws is governed by reasonableness and is highly deferential in light of delegated legislative authority.

A bylaw is invalid only where no reasonable municipal body, informed by relevant contextual factors and statutory limits, could have enacted it.

The appeal was dismissed because the bylaw fell within a reasonable range of outcomes and was adopted through a proper process.