Courting Confusion? Three Recent Alberta Cases on Equality Rights Post-Kapp
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29173/alr174Abstract
This article examines current confusion surrounding how courts are to analyze challenges brought under s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The authors begin with a review of the 2008 Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Kapp, which gave s. 15(2) independent status to shield ameliorative laws, programs, and activities from the finding of discrimination, but left the application of s. 15(1) unclear. The authors then articulate how three recent Alberta cases on equality post-Kapp illustrate the new uncertainty surrounding how courts are to address equality rights. Through an analysis of the Supreme Court’s 2009 decision in Ermineskin Band and Nation v. Canada, and subsequent decisions of the Alberta Court of Appeal in Morrow v. Zhang and Cunningham v. Alberta (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development), this article explores the Supreme Court’s failure to adequately guide lower courts and tribunals on how to apply s. 15 post-Kapp. For example, a framework for reconciling the new role of s. 15(2) and claims of under-inclusive ameliorative programs has yet to be developed. Further, the authors argue that the guidance that has been delivered has improperly narrowed the definition of discrimination to stereotyping and prejudice.Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
For Editions following and including Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
For Editions prior to Volume 61 No. 1, the following applies.
Author(s) retain original copyright in the substantive content of the titled work, subject to the following rights that are granted indefinitely:
- Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to produce, publish, disseminate, and distribute the titled work in electronic format to online database services, including, but not limited to: LexisNexis, QuickLaw, HeinOnline, and EBSCO;
- Author(s) grant the Alberta Law Review permission to post the titled work on the Alberta Law Review website and/or related websites.
- Author(s) agree that the titled work may be used for educational or instructional purposes and/or in educational or instructional materials. The author(s) acknowledge that the titled work is subject to other such "fair dealing" provisions and applicable legislation.
- Author(s) grant a limited license to those accessing the titled work from an electronic database or an Alberta Law Review website to download the titled work onto their computer and to print a copy for their own personal, non-commercial use, subject to proper attribution.
To use the journal's content elsewhere, permission must be obtained from the author(s) and the Alberta Law Review.