Vriend v Alberta [1998] 1 S.C.R. 493
Holding
Judicial History
Parties Involved
Ratio
- The legislative omission in Alberta’s Individual Rights Protection Act is in violation of s.15 and is not saved by s.1
- Alberta Court of Queen's Bench ruled that the omission of sexual orientation was a violation of s. 15(1) and cannot be saved under s. 1
- Alberta Court of Appeal overturned the decision
- The Charter applies to governmental omission as well as positive acts, and choosing not to include something in legislation that should be protected by the Charter is in violation of the Charter
- Omission of something in a piece of legislation is considered a government action
Appellants:
- Delwin Vriend, Gala-Gay and Lesbian Awareness Society of Edmonton, Gay and Lesbian Community Centre of Edmonton Society and Dignity Canada Dignité for Gay Catholics and Supporters
Respondent:
- Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Alberta and Her Majesty's Attorney General in and for the Province of Alberta
Section 1 Analysis
Issues
Facts of the Case
- Does a legislative omission fall under the protection the Charter?
- If not, was this violation saved by s.1 of the Charter?
- Pressing and substantive objective
- Vriend was dismissed from his position at King's College because of his sexual orientation
- Prevented from making a complaint under Alberta's Individual Rights Protection Act because it does not include sexual orientation as a prohibited grounds of discrimination
Discussion Questions
1. Do you think the SCC should be reading into legislation, rather than striking down the legislation, and then suspending the decision until the Alberta government had amended the legislation?
2. Do you think the Court should be more proactive in protecting constitutional rights (as they did in this case), or should it be left to elected representatives (i.e. the legislature/Parliament)?