CASL Constitutional Challenge An Overview

Similar documents
Beyond Disability Accommodating Family Status and Religion

Compliance and Enforcement Decision CRTC

RE: The Board s refusal to allow public access to the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Hearings

IN BRIEF SECTION 1 OF THE CHARTER AND THE OAKES TEST

NOTICE OF CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION

Syllabus. Canadian Constitutional Law

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: CHARTER COURSE SYLLABUS

Review of Administrative Decisions Involving Charter Rights: The Shortcomings of the SCC Decision in Doré

1.1.3 Notice of Memorandum of Understanding with the China Securities Regulatory Commission MEMORANDUM

Form F5 Change of Information in Form F4 General Instructions

The Constitutional Validity of Bill S-201. Presentation to the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights

Enforcement of International Arbitral Awards in Canada

Canada: Electronic Commerce Law Overview

TOP FIVE R v LLOYD, 2016 SCC 13, [2016] 1 SCR 130. Facts. Procedural History. Ontario Justice Education Network

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF ONTARIO)

Syllabus. Canadian Constitutional Law

Batty v City of Toronto: Municipalities at Forefront of Occupy Movement

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA

THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

Research Branch MR-18E. Mini-Review COMMERCIAL SIGNS IN QUEBEC: THE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS. Jean-Charles Ducharme Law and Government Division

Plain Packaging Questionnaire

Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony: A walk through and brief case analysis By Don Hutchinson

Privacy Law Update. Ontario Connections: Access, Privacy, Security & Records Management Conference, June 7, 2016

Broadcasting Notice of Consultation CRTC

COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA

ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F December 10, 2018 EDMONTON POLICE COMMISSION. Case File Number

CHAPTER 4 NEW ZEALAND BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 1990 AND HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1993 INTRODUCTION

Canada and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women

Indexed as: Edmonton Journal v. Alberta (Attorney General)

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Reed v. Nova Scotia (Human Rights Commission), 2017 NSSC 85

The Supreme Court of Canada and Hate Publications: Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission v. Whatcott

LANGUAGE REQUIREMENTS IN QUÉBEC UNDER

CONSULTATION MEMORANDUM Consultation regarding criminal court record information available through Court Services Online (July 2015)

Alberta Electric System Operator

ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS IN CANADA -AN OVERVIEW-

The British Columbia Utilities Commission: Customer Complaints Guide

Review and Investigation Procedures

REVIEW REPORT FI December 29, 2015 Department of Finance

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND ADVERTISING TO CHILDREN: IRWIN TOY LIMITED v. QUEBEC (AG)

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE (IN BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY) ) ) ) DAY OF JULY, 2015

COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA

Biosecurity Law Reform Bill

CHURCH LAW BULLETIN NO. 24

FACTUM OF THE APPELLANT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR MANITOBA)

Involved with Consumer Products in Canada?

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

Who's in Charge Here? Information Privacy in a Social Networking World

1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal of Alberta) BETWEEN:

Accommodation Without Compromise: Comment on Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony

Alberta Justice and Solicitor General. Information for Self-represented Litigants In. Provincial Court. Adult Criminal Court

THE USE OF EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE AND THE ANTI-INFLATION ACT REFERENCE

Start-up Crowdfunding Registration and Prospectus Exemptions Form 4 - Start-up Crowdfunding Funding Portal Individual Information

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT J. WILSON, KARAKATSANIS, AND BRYANT JJ. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Parliamentary Research Branch HUMAN RIGHTS LEGISLATION AND THE CHARTER: A COMPARATIVE GUIDE. Nancy Holmes Law and Government Division

Salt Box Coulee Water Supply Company Ltd. Customer Complaints - Infrastructure Repair Expense

Freedom of Expression in the Context of Airports Richard J. Charney Global Head, Employment and Labour Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP September 24,

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW LAW COURSE SYLLABUS

Devonia Rural Electrification Association Ltd.

As soon as possible in s. 48(2) of IRPA: Not possible to Enforce Removals in Breach of the Rule of Law and the Charter

UNDERSTAND YOUR RIGHTS AN ANNOTATED GUIDE TO THE CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS

February 23, Dear Ms. Ursulescu, Re: Legislative Model for Lobbying in Saskatchewan

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bresson v.nova Scotia (Community Services), 2016 NSSC 64. v. Nova Scotia (Department of Community Service)

R. v. Ferguson, 2008

Form F5 Start-up Crowdfunding Funding Portal Individual Information Form

NOTICE OF APPLICATION

Keith Pridgen and Steven Pridgen (applicants) v. The University of Calgary (respondent) ( ; 2010 ABQB 644)

DESIGNATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL DECISION MAKERS REGULATION

The Exercise of Statutory Discretion

Indexed As: Figueiras v. York (Regional Municipality) et al. Ontario Court of Appeal Rouleau, van Rensburg and Pardu, JJ.A. March 30, 2015.

The Increasing Irrelevance of Section 1 of the Charter

ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F July 7, 2017 EDMONTON POLICE SERVICE. Case File Number F5536

INDEX. A Access and correction requests, see also Access to and correction of personal information. .. Part 8 of the Act, 115

Government Introduces New Recruiting Requirements, Application Fee for LMOs

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DAVID CARMICHAEL. -and-

Alberta s Health Information Act and the Charter: A Discussion Paper

American Myths Revisited: the first year of Obama presidency

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL. NOTICE OF MOTION (Motion for Leave to Intervene)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: R. v. Black, 2006 BCSC 1357 Regina v. Date: Docket: Registry: Kelowna 2006 BCSC 1357

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR TRIAL DIVISION (GENERAL) ANDREW ABBASS

Form F3A. Personal Information Form and Authorization of Indirect Collection, Use and Disclosure of Personal Information

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA

Pension Arbitration Trumped by Class Proceeding Legislation

TO THE CREDITORS OF ALBERTA LTD., carrying on business as SPAREPARTS

LEYLA SMIRNOVA. and SKATE CANADA JURISDICTIONAL ORDER. Richard W. Pound, Q.C. Jurisdictional Arbitrator

Bail Amendment Bill 2012

Order F14-44 WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS TRIBUNAL. Elizabeth Barker, Adjudicator. October 3, 2014

Constitutional Practice and Procedure in Administrative Tribunals: An Emerging Issue

PUBLICATION BANS FIRST ISSUED: NOVEMBER 23, 2015 EDITED / DISTRIBUTED: NOVEMBER 23, 2015

Canadian soldiers are entitled to the rights and freedoms they fight to uphold.

Indexed As: Halifax (Regional Municipality) v. Human Rights Commission (N.S.) et al.

Indexed As: Royal Bank of Canada v. Trang. Ontario Court of Appeal Hoy, A.C.J.O., Laskin, Sharpe, Cronk and Blair, JJ.A. December 9, 2014.

Form F3A Personal Information Form and Authorization of Indirect Collection, Use and Disclosure of Personal Information

The Constitutionality of PIPEDA: A Re-consideration in the Wake of the Supreme Court of Canada s Reference re Securities Act

A RE-FORMULATION OF THE INTERJURISDICTIONAL IMMUNITY DOCTRINE

Time Extension Request Guidelines for Public Bodies. Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for Nova Scotia Updated: February 2, 2018

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. The Queen, 2011 SCC 3 DATE: DOCKET: 32987

Transcription:

McCarthy Tétrault Advance Building Capabilities for Growth CASL Constitutional Challenge An Overview Charles Morgan Direct Line: 514-397-4230 E-Mail: cmorgan@mccarthy.ca October 24, 2016

Overview Freedom of Expression Charter s. 2(b) Justification under s. 1 No intelligible standard for the prohibition No pressing and substantial objective No rational connection between means and objective Not minimally (or even reasonably) impairing Disproportionate impact Other issues: Division of Powers; Charter s. 11 2

Core Principles No matter how important Parliament's goal may seem, if the state has not demonstrated that the means by which it seeks to achieve its goal are reasonable and proportionate to the infringement of rights, then the law must perforce fail. RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1995] 3 SCR 199, para 129 A tribunal must respect the Constitution so that if it finds invalid a law it is called upon to apply, it is bound to treat it as having no force or effect. Douglas/kwantlen Faculty Assn. v. Douglas College, [1990] 3 SCR 570 3

Caveats This discussion is limited to the provisions of CASL dealing with Commercial Electronic Messages This discussion is limited to legal argument factual context is important to application 4

Freedom of Expression Charter s. 2(b) CASL s prohibition on sending Commercial Electronic Messages without consent unquestionably restricts expression, both by purpose and effect. Commercial expression is protected expression. Over and above its intrinsic value as expression, commercial expression which, as has been pointed out, protects listeners as well as speakers plays a significant role in enabling individuals to make informed economic choices, an important aspect of individual selffulfillment and personal autonomy Ford v. Quebec (Attorney General), [1988] 2 SCR 712 at 767 The only real question is whether the infringement is justifiable under s. 1. 5

Charter s. 1 Oakes Test Prescribed by Law Pressing and Substantial Concern Proportionality Rational Connection Minimal Impairment Proportionate Impact 6

Prescribed by Law Doctrines of Vagueness and Overbreadth are sometimes confused, but are conceptually separate. Vagueness deals with whether a provision is sufficiently clear to delineate a zone of risk. The law must give adequate notice of what is, or is not, permissible. Example: Nova Scotia s Cyberbullying statute In this regard, I find that the Act provides no intelligible standard according to which Justices of the Peace and the judiciary must do their work. It does not provide sufficiently clear standards to avoid arbitrary and discriminatory applications. The Legislature has given a plenary discretion to do whatever seems best in a wide set of circumstances. There is no "limit prescribed by law" and the impugned provisions of the Act cannot be justified under s. 1. Crouch v. Snell, 2015 NSSC 340, para. 137 7

CASL Definition of Commercial Electronic Message is broad and difficult to interpret. Purpose test is subjective, based on perceived intention of sender Not clear what kind of messages are covered what is similar to telephone, email, or instant messaging? What kind of similarity is relevant? Exceptions are equally difficult to interpret. CRTC guidance documents do little to answer basic questions about the contours of the prohibition (and lack force of law, in any event). 8

Pressing and Substantial Concern CASL is usually justified by reference to harms of spam, but its prohibition reaches beyond that Government cannot rely on a narrow salutary effect to justify a law which, in reality, has a different purpose c.f. R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 SCR 295 Technical solutions to spam have progressed enormously in effectiveness since the era when CASL was drafted 9

Rational Connection The vast majority of spam (more than 98%, in 2013) comes from outside Canada, beyond the effective reach of Canadian enforcement CASL s practical impact is primarily felt by legitimate Canadian businesses, who face substantial compliance obligations and invasive enforcement This burden on Canadian business has little or no impact on the harm it is intended to address 10

Minimal Impairment While the government is entitled to deference in formulating its objective, that deference is not blind or absolute. The test at the minimum impairment stage is whether there is an alternative, less drastic means of achieving the objective in a real and substantial manner. Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony, [2009] 2 SCR 567 There are many less drastic options that could have been equally effective at addressing the harms of spam : Opt-out consent, as in the US CAN-SPAM Act Broad inferred consent and a closed definition of commercial electronic message, as in Australian Spam Act 2003 Implied consent, as in PIPEDA Limiting prohibition to bulk messages Limiting prohibition to messages which cause, or could cause, substantial harm 11

Proportionate Impact The third branch requires proportionality between the effects of the measure limiting the freedoms in question and the objective, and also proportionality between the salutary and deleterious effects of that measure. Dagenais v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp., [1994] 3 SCR 835 at 843 CASL imposes an enormous burden on Canadian businesses Direct costs of compliance Lost value of forgone commercial expression CASL has had little, if any actual practical benefit to Canadians No indication that Canadians are spending less on email filtering, for example c.f. Alberta (information and Privacy Commissioner) v. United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 401, 2013 SCC 62 at para 25, ( The price PIPA exacts, however, is disproportionate to the benefits it promotes. ). 12

Division of Powers Pith and Substance analysis requires examination of a law s purpose and effects. Stated purpose of CASL was to address damaging and deceptive spam, but actual effect is to regulate ordinary commercial conduct. This falls within the provincial power of property and civil rights, or matters of a merely local or private nature, under s. 92 of the Constitution Act. Not covered by Federal Trade and Commerce power under s. 91(2). Not limited to a trade as a whole or a matter of genuine national importance. c.f. Reference re Securities Act, [2011] 3 SCR 837, 2011 SCC 66 The fact that national rules may seem convenient does not make the subject one of national concern. 13

Charter s. 11 Guarantees certain procedural rights, such as presumption of innocence CASL imposes a reverse onus to prove consent Engaged (inter alia) where a law has true penal consequences In my opinion, a true penal consequence which would attract the application of s. 11 is imprisonment or a fine which by its magnitude would appear to be imposed for the purpose of redressing the wrong done to society at large rather than to the maintenance of internal discipline within the limited sphere of activity. R. v. Wigglesworth, [1987] 2 SCR 541 14

CASL Applies a reverse onus e.g. burden to prove consent Applies the civil standard of proof Requires the accused to provide all of the evidence through the Notice to Produce Magnitude of AMPs are determined not based on an economic or mathematical analysis, but by qualitative and morally-laden factors such as nature and scope of violation, and assessment of subject s conduct. 15

Questions? 16

VANCOUVER Suite 1300, 777 Dunsmuir Street P.O. Box 10424, Pacific Centre Vancouver BC V7Y 1K2 Tel: 604-643-7100 Fax: 604-643-7900 Toll-Free: 1-877-244-7711 CALGARY Suite 3300, 421 7th Avenue SW Calgary AB T2P 4K9 Tel: 403-260-3500 Fax: 403-260-3501 Toll-Free: 1-877-244-7711 TORONTO Box 48, Suite 5300 Toronto Dominion Bank Tower Toronto ON M5K 1E6 Tel: 416-362-1812 Fax: 416-868-0673 Toll-Free: 1-877-244-7711 MONTRÉAL Suite 2500 1000 De La Gauchetière Street West Montréal QC H3B 0A2 Tel: 514-397-4100 Fax: 514-875-6246 Toll-Free: 1-877-244-7711 QUÉBEC Le Complexe St-Amable 1150, rue de Claire-Fontaine, 7e étage Québec QC G1R 5G4 Tel: 418-521-3000 Fax: 418-521-3099 Toll-Free: 1-877-244-7711 UNITED KINGDOM & EUROPE 125 Old Broad Street, 26th Floor London EC2N 1AR UNITED KINGDOM Tel: +44 (0)20 7489 5700 Fax: +44 (0)20 7489 5777 17