Reference Re Senate Reform
| Reference Re Senate Reform | |
|---|---|
|
| |
| Hearing: 14 November 2013 Judgment: 25 April 2014 | |
| Full case name | IN THE MATTER OF a Reference by the Governor in Council concerning reform of the Senate, as set out in Order in Council P.C. 2013-70, dated February 1, 2013 |
| Citations | 2014 SCC 32 |
| Docket No. | 35203 |
| Holding | |
| Term limits and consultative elections for the Senate cannot be implemented by Parliament alone, but requires approval via the 7/50 amending formula; abolishing the Senate requires unanimous consent of all provinces | |
| Court Membership | |
|
Chief Justice: Beverley McLachlin Puisne Justices: Louis LeBel, Rosalie Abella, Marshall Rothstein, Thomas Cromwell, Michael Moldaver, Andromache Karakatsanis, Richard Wagner | |
| Reasons given | |
| Unanimous reasons by | The Court |
Reference Re Senate Reform was a reference question to the Supreme Court of Canada regarding the constitutional validity of proposals to change the Senate, such as term limits, consultative elections, and abolishment. The ruling was announced April 2014, following arguments made in November 2013. The court decided that term limits and consultative elections could not be done by the Federal Government alone through Parliament, but also required the consent of seven provinces representing more than 50% of the population, in accordance with the lower of two thresholds for the constitutional amending formula.[1][2] The court also ruled that Senate abolishment would require the higher threshold for amendment: Parliamentary approval plus consent of all ten provinces.[1][2]
See also
References
- 1 2 "High court says no to unilateral Senate reform". Maclean's. Canadian Press. 25 April 2014. Retrieved 20 November 2015.
- 1 2 Macfarlane, Emmett (25 April 2014). "Did the Supreme Court just kill Senate reform?". Maclean's. Retrieved 20 November 2015.