Constitutional appeal concerning whether a provincial liquor-control provision limiting possession of non-provincially sourced alcohol violated s. 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
The Court held that s. 121 bars laws that in essence and primary purpose restrict interprovincial trade like tariffs, but does not invalidate laws whose trade impacts are incidental to broader regulatory objectives.
It also held that lower courts cannot depart from binding precedent absent genuinely transformative legal developments or new social and legislative facts.
Applying that framework, the impugned provision's main purpose was provincial control of liquor distribution and use, not trade restriction.
The appeal was allowed and the provision was upheld.
