SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Alberta v. Hutterian ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

ALBERTA V. HUTTERIAN BRETHREN OF WILSON COLONYHer Majesty The Queenin Right of the Province of AlbertaAppellantv.Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony andHutterian Brethren Church of WilsonRespondentsandAttorney General of Canada,Attorney General of Ontario,Attorney General of Quebec,Attorney General of British Columbia,Canadian Civil Liberties Association,Ontario Human Rights Commission,Evangelical Fellowship of Canada andChristian Legal FellowshipIntervenersIndexed as: Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson ColonyNeutral citation: 2009 SCC 37.File No.: 32186.2008: October 7; 2009: July 24
Present: McLachlin C.J. and Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Rothstein JJ.ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ALBERTAConstitutional law — Charter of Rights — Freedom of religion — New regulationrequiring photo for all Alberta driver’s licences — Members of Hutterian Brethren sincerelybelieving that Second Commandment prohibits them from having their photograph willingly taken— Whether regulation infringed freedom of religion — If so, whether infringement justified —Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 1, 2(a) — Operator Licensing and Vehicle ControlRegulation, Alta. Reg. 320/2002, s. 14(1)(b) (am. Alta. Reg. 137/2003, s. 3).Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Right to equality — Discrimination based onreligion — New regulation requiring photo for all Alberta driver’s licences — Members of HutterianBrethren sincerely believing that Second Commandment prohibits them from having theirphotograph willingly taken — Whether regulation infringed right to equality — Canadian Charterof Rights and Freedoms, s. 15 — Operator Licensing and Vehicle Control Regulation, Alta. Reg.320/2002, s. 14(1)(b) (am. Alta. Reg. 137/2003, s. 3).Alberta requires all persons who drive motor vehicles on highways to hold a driver’slicence. Since 1974, each licence has borne a photograph of the licence holder, subject toexemptions for people who objected to having their photographs taken on religious grounds.Religious objectors were granted a non-photo licence called a Condition Code G licence, at theRegistrar’s discretion. In 2003, the Province adopted a new regulation and made the photo
Page 1: SUPREME COURT OF CANADACITATION: Al
Page 5 and 6: Per McLachlin C.J. and Binnie, Desc
Page 7 and 8: self-sufficiency, but there is no e
Page 9 and 10: Under s. 1, courts have only rarely
Page 11 and 12: Quebec (Attorney General), [1989] 1
Page 14 and 15: Taylor, Charles. Philosophical Argu
Page 16 and 17: [1] The Province of Alberta require
Page 18 and 19: taken for “facial recognition sof
Page 20 and 21: The second is simply that a digital
Page 22 and 23: the extent that it renders a digita
Page 24 and 25: driver’s licences marked “not t
Page 26 and 27: Second Commandment: “You shall no
Page 28 and 29: [34] The record does not disclose a
Page 30 and 31: [39] Section 1 requires that before
Page 32 and 33: [43] The chambers judge found that
Page 34 and 35: connected to the goal of preserving
Page 36 and 37: ight is reasonably tailored to the
Page 38 and 39: associated with driver’s licences
Page 40 and 41: falls within a range of reasonable
Page 42 and 43: duty to accommodate, which applies
Page 44 and 45: impairing of the right and proporti
Page 46 and 47: need to realize it, the test of pro
Page 48 and 49: licence holders are represented by
Page 50 and 51: their s. 2(a) right. At this point,
Page 52 and 53:
formed under compulsion of the Stat
Page 54 and 55:
[97] The Hutterian claimants argue
Page 56 and 57:
[103] Balancing the salutary and de
Page 58 and 59:
each of s. 15(1).VI. Conclusion[109
Page 60 and 61:
R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985]
Page 62 and 63:
property and live together in relig
Page 64 and 65:
eliefs.In short, the Attorney Gener
Page 66 and 67:
(See also Jeremy Webber “The Irre
Page 68 and 69:
[133] Section 1 of the Charter stat
Page 70 and 71:
ationally connected to the legislat
Page 72 and 73:
[148] In RJR-MacDonald, McLachlin J
Page 74 and 75:
measure need to be assessed in ligh
Page 76 and 77:
[159] It is worth noting too that i
Page 78 and 79:
of the Hutterian community:The Hutt
Page 80 and 81:
“privilege”. This approach, wit
Page 82 and 83:
The following are the reasons deliv
Page 84 and 85:
of the case.B. Section 1: The Oakes
Page 86 and 87:
question (the “minimal impairment
Page 88 and 89:
It is at these stages that the mean
Page 90 and 91:
absolute and should not be treated
Page 92 and 93:
[200] As to the outcome of this cas
Page 94:
General, Toronto.Solicitor for the
show all

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Alberta v. Hutterian ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?