Unit 2 Constitutional Law Part A

Question 1

What were the legal charges in Big M. DrugMart?

Answer 1

• Unlawfully operating a business on a Sunday
• Charged with violating s.4 of the Lord’s day Act

Question 2

Why did Big M. DrugMart go to the Supreme Court?

Answer 2

• Because they argued that the legislation violated their charter section.

Question 3

What was the Legislation in Big M. DrugMart?

Answer 3

the Lord’s Day Act.

Question 4

What section of the Charter was used in Big M DrugMart?

Answer 4

Section 2(a) - freedom of religion

Question 5

What was the final decision in Big M DrugMart?

Answer 5

The case got aquitted.

Question 6

What were the legal charges in Rodriguez v. British Columbia

Answer 6

Legalization of medically assisted suicide

Question 7

Why did Rodriguez V. Columbia go to the Supreme Court?

Answer 7

Because she was in severe pain due to her medical conditions, and she was not able to commit suicide without the help of professionals.

Question 8

What legislation was involved in Rodriguez v. Canada?

Answer 8

Section 241 Criminal Code - aiding in suicide is considered an offense.

Question 9

What charter sections were used in Rodriguez v. Canada?

Answer 9

7 - Life, Liberty and Security of a person
12 - No one should be subject to cruel punishments
15 - Equality Rights

Question 10

What was the final decision of Rodriguez v. Canada?

Answer 10

In favour of the Crown.

Question 11

What were the legal charges of R. v. Keegstra

Answer 11

Speaking* false information about the holocaust.

Question 12

Why did R. v. Keegstra go to the Supreme Court?

Answer 12

Because they infringed individual’s rights in order to protect societal rights (society over the individual)

Question 13

What legislation is involved in R. v. Keegstra?

Answer 13

Section 319 of the Criminal Code - willingly promoting hatred in public against an identifiable group.

Question 14

What charter sections were used in R. v. Keegstra?

Answer 14

1 - reasonable limit clause
11d - Innocent until proven guilty

Question 15

What was the final decision in R. v. Keegstra?

Answer 15

In favour of the Crown.

Question 16

What were the legal charges in R. v. Zundel?

Answer 16

He published misinformation regarding the holocaust

Question 17

Why did R. v. Zundel go to the Supreme Court?

Answer 17

He appealed 2 times to the charges, but both times he got denied, so he felt like his freedom of speech was being violated

Question 18

What legislation was involved in R. v. Zundel?

Answer 18

181 of Criminal Code - one who wilfully publishes a statement that he knows is false and that causes harm, is guilty of an indictable offence

Question 19

What sections of the charter is involved in R. v. Zundel?

Answer 19

2(b) - expression
7 - Life, Liberty, and Security of a person.

Question 20

What was the final decision in R. v. Zundel?

Answer 20

Ruled in favor of Zundel. Section 181 is unconstitutional and violates section 2(b) of the charter.

Question 21

What were the legal charges in Suave v. Canada?

Answer 21

argued that Section 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act hindered inmate’s rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

Question 22

What legislation was involved in Suave v. Canada?

Answer 22

Section 51(e) of the Canada Elections Act - disqualifies prisoners serving a sentence greater than 2 years to from voting in federal elections

Question 23

What charter sections are involved in Suave v. Canada?

Answer 23

Section 3 - Democratic rights
Section 33 - Notwithstanding clause

Question 24

What was the final decision in Suave v. Canada

Answer 24

Section 51(e) was struck downSection 51(e) was struck down

Question 25

What was the legal issue in Zylberberg v. Sudbury Board of Education?

Answer 25

Parents claimed that the daily prayer violated their children’s freedom of religion

Question 26

Why did Zylberberg go to the Supreme Court?

Answer 26

The school did not impose religion, so there was no denial of religious freedom. They dismissed the parents, so they appealed to the court arguing section 262 violates the charter

Question 27

What legislation was involved in the Zylberberg’s case?

Answer 27

Regulation 262

Question 28

What charter right was involved in the Zylberberg case?

Answer 28

2(a) - freedom of religion

Question 29

What was the final decision in the Zylberberg case?

Answer 29

The appealed was allowed, and the regulation and board violated section 2(a) of the charter.