Canadian Law Fundamentals: Key Concepts and Landmark Cases

Posted on Jul 8, 2025 in Law & Jurisprudence

Canadian Law: Foundations and Key Terms

• Anarchist Law: Rejects all laws as unjust. Example: Refusing to pay taxes.
• Colonial Law: Law as a tool of colonial control. Example: Residential school laws.
• Dialectical Materialism: History shaped by class conflict. Example: Capitalism replacing feudalism.
• Feminist Legal Theory: Law reflects male bias. Example: Reforming domestic violence laws.
• Indigenous Law: Rooted in tradition and land. Example: Healing circles.
• Injustice: Unfairness. Example: Racial profiling.
• Justice: Fair treatment. Example: Equal trial rights.
• Laissez-faire Capitalism: Minimal government regulation. Example: 19th-century industrial era.
• Legal Realism: Law shaped by judges’ biases. Example: Politically motivated ruling.
• Lex Injusta Non Est Lex: An unjust law is not a valid law. Example: Defying segregation laws.
• Marxism: Law serves the wealthy. Example: Property laws favoring elites.
• Natural Law: Law reflects universal morals. Example: Laws against murder.
• Nulla Poena Sine Lege: No punishment without law. Example: No retroactive laws.
• Positivism: Law is valid if formally enacted. Example: A tax law stands even if considered unfair.
• Social Contract: Citizens accept law for order. Example: Obeying traffic rules.
• Sovereign: The highest legal authority. Example: The Canadian Parliament.
• Suffragette: Fought for women’s right to vote. Example: Nellie McClung.

Legal Origins and Systems

• Books of Authority: Trusted legal texts. Example: Blackstone’s Commentaries.
• Case Law: Judge-made law, based on judicial decisions. Example: R v. Jordan.
• Constitution Act, 1791: Split Upper and Lower Canada. Example: Established new legislatures.
• Controlled Drugs and Substances Act: Federal legislation governing drug offenses. Example: Heroin ban.
• Custom: Long-standing practice recognized as law. Example: Common law marriage.
• Defendant: The accused or sued party in a legal action. Example: The person on trial.
• Domestic Law: Laws applicable within a specific nation. Example: The Criminal Code of Canada.
• Feudalism: A land-for-service system. Example: Medieval lords and vassals.
• Hansard: The official transcript of parliamentary debates. Example: Used for interpreting legislative intent.
• Headnote: A summary of key points in a legal case. Example: Key points listed at the beginning of a reported judgment.
• International Law: Laws governing relations between nations. Example: The Geneva Conventions.
• Keywords: Terms used to categorize or search for legal cases. Example: “Negligence.”
• Magna Carta: A 1215 charter of liberties. Example: Established the right to a fair trial.
• Mens Rea: A guilty mind; criminal intent. Example: Intent to steal.
• Party: A litigant in a legal case. Example: Plaintiff or defendant.
• Plaintiff: The person initiating a lawsuit. Example: In a contract dispute.
• Pluralist Framework: Recognition of multiple legal systems. Example: Indigenous law alongside common law.
• Private Law: Law governing relations between individuals. Example: Divorce cases.
• Procedural Law: Rules governing legal processes and court procedures. Example: Steps in a trial.
• Public Law: Law governing relations between the government and individuals. Example: Criminal law.
• Quebec Act: Preserved French civil law and rights in Quebec. Example: Civil law system maintained.
• Royal Proclamation of 1763: Recognized Indigenous land rights. Example: Basis for modern land claims.
• Style of Cause: The official title of a legal case. Example: R v. Smith.
• Substantive Law: Defines rights, duties, and prohibitions. Example: Prohibiting assault.

Interpreting Legal Statutes and Precedents

• Ambiguous Term: Unclear wording in a legal text. Example: “Reasonable force.”
• Binding: A legal precedent that must be followed by lower courts. Example: A Supreme Court of Canada ruling.
• Canons of Construction: Rules used to interpret statutes. Example: Context matters in interpretation.
• Case Law: Past judicial judgments used as precedent. Example: A judge refers to a previous ruling.
• Common Law: A legal system based on judge-made precedent and tradition. Example: Negligence law.
• Golden Rule: A principle of statutory interpretation to avoid absurd outcomes. Example: Broadens meaning if needed to prevent an illogical result.
• Judgment: A court’s official decision or ruling. Example: Guilty or not guilty verdict.
• Literal Rule: Interpreting words in a statute according to their plain, ordinary meaning. Example: “Vehicles” means all types of vehicles.
• Persuasive: A legal precedent that is not binding but can influence a court’s decision. Example: Rulings from other provinces.
• Plain Meaning Rule: Interpreting a statute by its ordinary, common meaning. Example: “Bank” refers to a financial institution.
• Precedent: A previous case or legal decision that serves as a rule or example. Example: Donoghue v. Stevenson.
• Rule in Heydon’s Case: A principle of statutory interpretation that considers the law’s purpose or “mischief” it was intended to remedy. Example: Solves prior problems the common law did not address.
• Statutory Interpretation: The process of clarifying the meaning of statutes. Example: Understanding ambiguous laws.

Canadian Constitutional Law

• Amending Formula: The process for changing the Constitution of Canada. Example: The 7/50 rule (seven provinces representing 50% of the population).
• Bicameral Parliament: A legislative body with two chambers. Example: The House of Commons and the Senate.
• British North America Act, 1867 (BNA Act): Canada’s founding constitutional statute. Example: Created the federal system of government.
• Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: A constitutional guarantee of rights and freedoms. Example: Freedom of speech.
• Charlottetown Accord: A failed constitutional reform deal in 1992. Example: Rejected in a national referendum.
• Constitution Act, 1982: Added the Charter and amending powers to the Constitution. Example: Achieved patriation of the Constitution.
• Constitutional Law: The supreme legal authority in Canada. Example: Governs the division of powers between federal and provincial governments.
• Intra Vires: Within the legal power or authority. Example: Federal taxes are intra vires the federal government.
• Limitations Clause (Section 1 of Charter): Allows for reasonable limits on Charter rights. Example: Rights are subject to reasonable limits prescribed by law.
• Meech Lake Accord: A failed 1987 constitutional reform deal. Example: Proposed recognizing Quebec as a distinct society.
• Notwithstanding Clause (Section 33 of Charter): Allows Parliament or a provincial legislature to override certain Charter rights. Example: Quebec’s language laws have used this clause.
• Oakes Case: Established a test for justifying limits on Charter rights under Section 1. Example: Any limit must be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
• Parliamentary Supremacy: The principle that Parliament can make any law. Example: Except where limited by the Constitution.
• Patriation: The process of bringing the Constitution under Canadian control. Example: The 1982 event.
• Sections 91 and 92 (Constitution Act, 1867): Divide federal and provincial legislative powers. Example: Section 91 covers immigration, Section 92 covers education.
• Ultra Vires: Beyond the legal power or authority. Example: A province enacting a national defense law would be ultra vires (invalid).

Landmark Canadian Court Decisions

The following cases represent significant rulings that have shaped Canadian law and constitutional interpretation.

Ontario Mushroom Co. Ltd. et al. v. Learie et al. (1970)

• Issue: Trespass and property rights in labor disputes.
• Summary: This case involved striking workers picketing on company property. The court ruled their actions constituted trespass and issued an injunction to stop it. It clarified the limits of picketing and property rights in labor disputes.

Gorris v. Scott (1874)

• Issue: Negligence and statutory duties.
• Summary: An English common law case where sheep were washed overboard due to the ship owner’s failure to comply with regulations. The court held the regulations were meant to prevent disease, not drowning. This case established that statutory duties must be breached in the manner and for the purpose the statute intended to support a claim.

R v. Scott (1978)

• Issue: Consent and sexual assault.
• Summary: This case clarified that a person cannot consent to serious bodily harm in the context of sexual activity. The court ruled that consent is not a valid defense in situations involving serious physical injury, setting limits on how far consent can go in criminal law.

Heydon’s Case (1584)

• Issue: Statutory interpretation (the “mischief rule”).
• Summary: An English landmark case that created the “mischief rule” of statutory interpretation. Courts should interpret statutes by identifying:
  1. The common law before the Act,
  2. The mischief and defect not addressed by the common law,
  3. The remedy Parliament provided,
  4. The true reason for the remedy.
  It is still cited in Canadian courts today.

R v. Luxton (1990)

• Note: This case is further summarized below. It upheld the mandatory life sentence without parole for 25 years for first-degree murder under Section 12 of the Charter.

R v. Lloyd (2016)

• Issue: Mandatory minimum sentences and cruel and unusual punishment (Section 12 of the Charter).
• Summary: The Supreme Court struck down a one-year mandatory minimum sentence for drug possession for repeat offenders under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, ruling it violated Section 12 of the Charter (cruel and unusual punishment).

Edwards v. Canada (Attorney General) (1930)

• Also known as: The Persons Case.
• Issue: Women’s eligibility for Senate appointment.
• Summary: The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council ruled that women are “persons” under the British North America Act and therefore eligible to be appointed to the Senate. This was a milestone in Canadian constitutional and feminist history.

Halpern v. Canada (Attorney General) (2003)

• Issue: Same-sex marriage and equality rights (Section 15 of the Charter).
• Summary: The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that the common law definition of marriage as between a man and a woman violated the equality rights under Section 15 of the Charter. The court ordered that same-sex couples be allowed to marry, helping to legalize same-sex marriage in Canada.

Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott (2013)

• Issue: Hate speech versus freedom of expression (Section 2(b) of the Charter).
• Summary: The Supreme Court upheld some parts of Saskatchewan’s human rights legislation that restricted hate speech. It ruled that speech targeting protected groups with extreme statements that expose them to hatred is not protected by Section 2(b) of the Charter (freedom of expression).

Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys (2006)

• Issue: Religious freedom in schools (Section 2(a) of the Charter).
• Summary: The Supreme Court ruled that banning a Sikh student from wearing a kirpan (a ceremonial dagger) violated his Section 2(a) Charter right to freedom of religion. The Court held that safety concerns could be accommodated.

R v. Morgentaler (1988)

• Issue: Abortion law and security of the person (Section 7 of the Charter).
• Summary: The Supreme Court struck down Canada’s abortion law as unconstitutional under Section 7 of the Charter. The Court found that the procedural requirements infringed on women’s rights to security of the person.

R v. Jordan (2016)

• Issue: Right to be tried within a reasonable time (Section 11(b) of the Charter).
• Summary: The Court set new time limits (18 months for provincial courts, 30 months for superior courts) to bring a case to trial. Delays beyond that are presumed unreasonable unless justified.

R v. Luxton (1990)

• Issue: Mandatory life sentence for first-degree murder.
• Summary: The Supreme Court upheld the mandatory life sentence without parole for 25 years, finding it did not violate Section 12 (cruel and unusual punishment) or Section 7 of the Charter.

Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia (1989)

• Issue: Equality rights under Section 15 of the Charter.
• Summary: The Court found that a requirement for Canadian citizenship to practice law in British Columbia discriminated based on citizenship and violated Section 15. This was the first major equality rights case under the Charter.

R v. Kapp (2008)

• Issue: Affirmative action and equality rights (Section 15 of the Charter).
• Summary: The Supreme Court held that a federal fishing license program giving exclusive access to Indigenous fishers did not violate Section 15 because it was protected by Section 15(2), which allows for ameliorative programs targeting disadvantaged groups.

R v. Butler (1992)

• Issue: Obscenity laws and freedom of expression (Section 2(b) of the Charter).
• Summary: The Court ruled that criminal obscenity laws did limit Section 2(b) rights but were justified under Section 1 of the Charter to protect society from harm, especially from degrading or violent pornography.