To support us, please follow us wherever you're listening and visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠our website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to provide feedback.

Constitutional law — Division of powers — Double aspect doctrine — Federal paramountcy

(0:00:10) Reasons for Judgment: Wagner C.J. (Karakatsanis, Côté, Rowe, Martin, Kasirer, Jamal and O’Bonsawin JJ. concurring)
(0:00:16) Introduction – 1
(0:01:52) I. Background – 3
(0:08:46) II. Judicial History – 9
(0:08:48) A. Quebec Superior Court, 2019 QCCS 3664 – 9
(0:11:54) B. Quebec Court of Appeal, 2021 QCCA 1325 – 14
(0:15:30) III. Issues – 18
(0:16:28) IV. Analysis – 20
(0:16:30) A. Did the Quebec Court of Appeal Err in Law in Holding That Sections 5 and 10 of the Provincial Act Are Constitutionally Valid? – 20
(0:17:05) (1) Analytical Framework – 21
(0:19:40) (2) Characterization of the Impugned Provisions – 28
(0:24:59) (a) Purpose of the Impugned Provisions – 35
(0:25:03) (i) Intrinsic Evidence – 35
(0:32:09) (ii) Extrinsic Evidence – 46
(0:40:25) (b) Effects of the Impugned Provisions – 58
(0:45:37) (c) Conclusion on Pith and Substance – 64
(0:46:11) (3) Classification of the Impugned Provisions – 65
(0:56:42) (4) Conclusion on the Constitutional Validity of the Impugned Provisions – 79
(0:58:24) B. Did the Quebec Court of Appeal Err in Law in Holding That Sections 5 and 10 of the Provincial Act Are Constitutionally Operative? – 83
(1:14:54) V. Conclusion – 105