Ford v. Quebec (Attorney General)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ford v. Quebec (Attorney General)

Supreme Court of Canada
Hearing: November 16 - 18, 1987
Judgment: December 15, 1988
Full case name: The Attorney General of Quebec v. La Chaussure Brown's Inc., Valerie Ford, McKenna Inc., Nettoyeur et Tailleur Masson Inc. and La Compagnie de Fromage Nationale Ltée
Citations: [1988] 2 S.C.R. 712
Ruling: Appeal dismissed.
Court membership

Chief Justice: Brian Dickson
Puisne Justices: Jean Beetz, Willard Estey, William McIntyre, Antonio Lamer, Bertha Wilson, Gerald Le Dain, Gérard La Forest, Claire L'Heureux-Dubé
Reasons given
Unanimous reason by: The Court
Laws applied
Forget v. Quebec (Attorney General), [1988] 2 S.C.R. 90

Ford v. Quebec (Attorney General), [1988] 2 S.C.R. 712 is a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court struck down part of the Charter of the French Language, commonly known as Bill 101, which restricted the use of commercial signs written in English, on the grounds that it violated the freedom of expression.

Contents

[edit] Background

The appeal, taken by the government of Quebec, was the consolidation of many cases begun by a Montreal businessman, Hyman Singer. A number of merchants who had been fined for violation of the Charter of the French language decided not to pay and go to court. Following complaints by French-speaking customers, the Office québécois de la langue française had instructed them to inform and serve their customers in French and replace their English language signs by French ones. The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the Quebec Superior Court and the Quebec Court of Appeal in that the signs could not be prohibited by the law in its current state.

[edit] Decision

The court found that the provisions violate the freedom of expression protected by section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and that the violation could not be justified under section 1 of the Charter and also violated section 3 of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.

[edit] Aftermath

In late 1989, shortly after the Supreme Court's decision, the Quebec National Assembly passed Bill 178, which made minor amendments to the Charter of the French Language. Recognizing that the amendments did not follow the Supreme Court's ruling, the National Assembly invoked section 33 of the Canadian Charter (also known as the Notwithstanding Clause), shielding Bill 178 from review by courts for five years.

This move was politically controversial, both among Quebec nationalists who were unhappy with the changes to the Charter of the French Language, and among anglophones who opposed the use of the Notwithstanding Clause. Tension over this issue was a contributing factor to the failure of the Meech Lake Accord.

In 1993, the Charter of the French Language was amended in the manner suggested by the Supreme Court of Canada. Bill 86 was passed by the National Assembly of Quebec to amend the law, which now states that French must be predominant on commercial signs where a language other than French is also used.

[edit] See also

[edit] External links

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../f/o/r/Ford_v._Quebec_%28Attorney_General%29_222a.html"