Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2012 ONCA ... - York University
Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2012 ONCA ... - York University
Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford, 2012 ONCA ... - York University
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Page: 12[15] In addition to the definition provided in s. 197(1), s. 213(2) defines “publicplace” as including “any motor vehicle located in a public place or in any placeopen to public view.”[16] The practical effect of these provisions is that there is only one way to sellsex in <strong>Canada</strong> without risking criminal sanction. This is what is referred to as“out-call” work, where a prostitute meets a customer at an indoor location suchas a hotel room or the customer‟s home.[17] “In-call” work, where the prostitute services customers from a fixed indoorlocation such as her 3 home or a commercial brothel, is prohibited by the bawdyhouseprovisions.[18] Although providing sexual services to customers encountered on the streetis not itself illegal, communicating the willingness to provide such services isprohibited by the communicating provision.Street prostitution is thereforeeffectively illegal.[19] Finally, the prohibition against living on the avails of prostitution targetsanyone who provides goods or services to prostitutes, because they areprostitutes. This encompasses not only pimps who exploit prostitutes for theirown purposes, but anyone who derives profit from the prostitution of others. This3 Throughout these reasons, we use feminine pronouns when referring to prostitutes because theevidence establishes that the majority of prostitutes are women. However, we recognize that, as some ofthe interveners point out, there are also a significant number of men, and transgendered and transsexualpersons working as prostitutes.