R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd. | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Supreme Court of Canada |
||||||
| Argued March 6 - 7, 1984 Decided April 24, 1985 |
||||||
|
||||||
| Holding | ||||||
| The Lord's Day Act violates section 2 of the Charter and is invalid. | ||||||
| Court membership | ||||||
|
||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||
|
R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295 is a landmark decision by Supreme Court of Canada where the Court struck down the Lord's Day Act for violating section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This case had many firsts in constitutional law including being the first to interpret section 2.
Contents |
[edit] Background
On Sunday, May 30, 1982 the Calgary store, Big M Drug Mart was charged with unlawfully carrying on the sale of goods on a Sunday contrary to the Lord's Day Act of 1906. At trial the store was acquitted and an appeal was dismissed by the Alberta Court of Appeal.
The constitutional question put before the Court was whether the Act infringed the right to freedom of conscience and religion, if so, whether it is justified under section 1 of the Charter, and whether the Act was enacted validly pursuitant the criminal law power under section 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867.
[edit] Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled that the statute was an unconstitutional violation of section 2 of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, deciding that there was no true secular basis for the legislation and its only purpose was, in effect, to establish a state religious-based requirement, and was therefore invalid. The drug store's victory was made possible by section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which provides that unconstitutional laws can be found invalid, as opposed to section 24 of the Charter, which is for those whose rights are violated. Inasmuch as a corporation is not a natural person, it cannot have a religion and therefore the corporation's religious freedom was not violated.
Justice Dickson wrote, "The interpretation [of the Charter] should be ... a generous rather than a legalistic one, aimed at fulfilling the purpose of the guarantee and securing for individuals the full benefit of the Charter's protection."
The Lord's Day Act was the first law in Charter jurisprudence to be struck down in its entirety, and some of the section 1 analysis in the decision played a role in developing the Oakes test in the later case R. v. Oakes.
[edit] Footnotes
- ↑ Laskin had stepped down in mid-March due to ill health and took no part in the case.
- ↑ Peter W. Hogg, Constitutional Law of Canada, 2003 Student Ed. (Scarborough, Ontario: Thomson Canada Limited, 2003), pp. 742-743.
[edit] See also
- List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Dickson Court)
- R. v. Edwards Books and Art Ltd. (1986) - later Sunday closing law decision
