Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
The defendant believed that their guaranteed rights and freedoms were being infringed upon and violated
They believed that they were being compelled to Christian beliefs despite not being Christian
Argued that they could have made profit on Sunday but since having to follow the act, money was lost
Section 2
- Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion
Section 4 of the Lord's Day Act
- It is not lawful for any person on the Lord's Day ... to sell or offer for sale or purchase any goods, ... or to transact any business
What is religion under section 2(a)?
Is this infringement of section 2(a) saved under section (1)?
Is the Lord's Day Act an infringement of conscience and Religion guaranteed by the charter?
A person should not be coerced or compelled by the state to observe a religious practice.
An invalid purpose kills legislation, and a shifting purpose is not permitted. Freedom of religious entails:
1.Absence of coercion or constraint
2.The right to manifest beliefs and practices
Section 2(a) of the Charter states that everyone has the freedom of religion
The Act compels all Canadians to observe a Christian day which conflicts with this section
Section 7 of the Charter states that the "Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians"
The Act only represents Canadians as one faith
The Act discriminates against non Christians and infringes on their rights and freedoms
The provincial court dismissed the appeal on the terms that the Lord's Day Act was unconstitutional
At the Alberta Court of Appeal, the case was dismissed because the charges were unconstitutional. The judges viewed the Act as valid Federal Legislation
In the Supreme Court of Canada, the Big M Drug Mart won the case. The judge ruled that the statute was an unconstitutional violation of section 2 of the Charter
This case was significant to Canadian history because it was the first time ever that a law in the Charter was taken down in its entirety
This case had a large impact on the Oakes Test which is what determines whether a law constitutes a reasonable limit to the Charter
Stores and businesses can now legally operate on Sunday's which is beneficial for millions
The Lord's Day Act made it an offense to engage in business on Sunday
The Act was challenged under section 2(a)
Big M charged with carrying on the sale of goods on Sunday, contrary to the Lord’s Day Act
Big M challenges the Act as infringing on the guarantee of freedom of religion
The court case was tried in Alberta
Big M Drug Mart was charged in 1982 because the Lord's Day Act was enforced in 1906
Court felt that the company violated section 4 of the Act and it had been instituted for years previous to the violation
Melina Morgan