Section 2: Fundamental Freedoms
Crookes v. Newton, 2011 SCC 47
In the landmark case of Crooks v. Newton, the Supreme Court of Canada clarified the law of defamation in the context of the internet, stating that merely linking to defamatory content on another web page does not constitute “publication,” and therefore is not defamatory in and of itself. Continue reading
Ontario (Attorney General) v. Fraser, 2011 SCC 20
In Ontario (Attorney General) v. Fraser, the Supreme Court of Canada considered the extent to which collective bargaining rights are covered by the guarantee of freedom of association, and ultimately struck down an Ontario Court of Appeal decision on the matter as being too broad. Continue reading
R. v. Zundel, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 731
In R. v. Zundel, the Supreme Court of Canada examined the constitutionality of Section 181 of the Criminal Code, the so-called “false news law,” which was initially designed to protect the reputations of politicians, but in this case was used against a Toronto-based publisher who prolifically and unrelentingly published material questioning the historically-accepted account of the Holocaust in Germany during World War II. Continue reading
R. v. Butler, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 452
The Appellant, Butler, had been convicted of possession and distribution of “obscenity,” for material sold at his Winnipeg, Manitoba retail outlet, Avenue Video Boutique. The task of the Supreme Court of Canada in considering Mr. Butler’s appeal was to make a determination as to the constitutionality of Section 163 of the Criminal Code, Canada’s obscenity law, and further to interpret Section 163 to determine what types of material fall under the umbrella of “obscenity.” Continue reading
R. v. Keegstra, [1990] 3 SCR 697
James Keegstra, a schoolteacher, was charged with the willful promotion of hatred under Section 319(2) of the Criminal Code, for allegedly anti-Semitic statements made during class. Mr. Keegstra successfully challenged the Criminal Code section in the Alberta Court of Appeal, which held that it was an infringement on freedom of expression, as protected by Section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Continue reading
Irwin Toy Ltd. v. Quebec (Attorney General), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927
Irwin Toy Ltd.’s challenge of a Quebec law prohibiting advertising targeted at children under thirteen years of age led the Supreme Court of Canada to an extensive analysis of the meaning of freedom of expression, and what limits on expression can be tolerated in a free and democratic society. Continue reading
Ford v. Quebec (Attorney General), [1988] 2 S.C.R. 265
On February 15, 1984, a group of Quebec retailers challenged provincial legislation prohibiting the use of English advertising on outdoor signs. The case made it all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada and pitted Quebec’s regional objective of preserving French culture against the fundamental freedom of expression protected by Section 2(b) of the Charter. Continue reading