Introducing 

Prezi AI.

Your new presentation assistant.

Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.

Loading…
Transcript

Beliefs

Charter Challenge

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

Issue

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?

Reasoning

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

Impact

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

Facts of the Case

Judgment

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

Court

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

(R) v. Big M Drug Mart

Melina Morgan

Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi