Law Society Of Upper Canada V Skapinker
   HOME

TheInfoList



OR:

''Law Society of Upper Canada v Skapinker'',
984 Year 984 ( CMLXXXIV) was a leap year starting on Tuesday (link will display the full calendar) of the Julian calendar. Events By place Europe * Spring – German boy-king Otto III (4-years old) is seized by the deposed Henry II ...
1 S.C.R. 357 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on
mobility rights Freedom of movement, mobility rights, or the right to travel is a human rights concept encompassing the right of individuals to travel from place to place within the territory of a country,Jérémiee Gilbert, ''Nomadic Peoples and Human Rights' ...
protected under section 6 of the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms The ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' (french: Charte canadienne des droits et libertés), often simply referred to as the ''Charter'' in Canada, is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada, forming the first part ...
. It is also the first Charter decision to reach the Supreme Court since its enactment in 1982.


Background

Joel Skapinker was a citizen of
South Africa South Africa, officially the Republic of South Africa (RSA), is the Southern Africa, southernmost country in Africa. It is bounded to the south by of coastline that stretch along the Atlantic Ocean, South Atlantic and Indian Oceans; to the ...
residing in Canada who applied to the
Ontario Ontario ( ; ) is one of the thirteen provinces and territories of Canada.Ontario is located in the geographic eastern half of Canada, but it has historically and politically been considered to be part of Central Canada. Located in Central C ...
bar to practice law. The bar refused his application as the Law Society Act required that he be a Canadian citizen. Skapinker has brought an application to have the provision of the Act requiring Canadian citizenship be held inoperative on the basis that it violated section 6(2)(b) of the Charter. At trial, the application was denied. However, on appeal the Court held that his mobility rights were in fact violated.


Opinion of the Court

The unanimous Court held that Skapinker's rights were not violated by the Law Society Act. Estey J., writing for the Court, acknowledged the difficulty in interpreting the Charter as it was not to be treated like a statute. He examined the headings of each section and tried to reconcile them with the wording of the sections. He noted several factors that must be considered: *the degree of difficulty because of ambiguity or obscurity in construing the section; * the length and complexity of the provision; * the apparent homogeneity of the provision appearing under the heading; the use of generic terminology in the heading; * the presence or absence of a system of headings which appear to segregate the component elements of the Charter; * and the relationship of the terminology employed in the heading to the substance of the headlined provision. In the end Estey finds that section 6 "does not establish a separate and distinct right to work divorced from the mobility provisions in which it is found. The two rights (in para. (a) and in para. (b)) both relate to movement into another province, either for the taking up of residence, or to work without establishing residence." Consequently, the appeal was overturned. Estey, however, added that his interpretation has been intentionally cautious due to the newness of the Charter and that there may warrant further expansion of the right in the future.


See also

*
List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Dickson Court) This is a chronological list of notable cases decided by the Supreme Court of Canada The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC; french: Cour suprême du Canada, CSC) is the Supreme court, highest court in the Court system of Canada, judicial system of ...
* ''
Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia ''Andrews v Law Society of British Columbia'', 9891 SCR 143 is the first Supreme Court of Canada case to deal with section 15 (equality rights) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms''. The court outlined a test, sometimes called the "' ...
'' − a case in which a similar citizenship requirement was struck down as a violation of the appellant's Section 15 ''Charter'' rights.


External links

* {{lexum-scc2, 1984, 1, 357, 3 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms case law Supreme Court of Canada cases 1984 in Canadian case law