Triage and Dissensus at the Supreme Court of Canada: A Review of the Court’s 2020 Constitutional Decisions

Authors

Bruce Ryder, Osgoode Hall Law School of York UniversityFollow

Abstract

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic forced the Supreme Court of Canada to make significant adaptations in 2020. The Court heard fewer appeals, decided fewer cases and adjusted to the necessity of online hearings. Despite the challenges posed by the pandemic, the Court issued a handful of landmark rulings in 2020. These rulings engaged critically with the Court’s past jurisprudence, considered a wide range of scholarship, and broke new ground by boldly clarifying and developing the law. The Court’s 2020 constitutional decisions were also characterized by a dramatic approach to triage and a remarkable degree of dissensus. The Court prioritized its limited jurisprudential resources by deciding a third of the appeals it heard in 2020 in summary oral reasons delivered from the bench. Another troubling feature of the Court’s 2020 opinions is the high level of dissensus they exhibit: the justices were deeply divided on almost all of the major constitutional cases they decided. Dissents are productive and enriching in important ways. But some of the justices’ dissenting energy in 2020 might have been better directed to the writing of reasons — any reasons — in some of the cases that the Court summarily dismissed from the bench.

Citation Information

Ryder, Bruce. "Triage and Dissensus at the Supreme Court of Canada: A Review of the Court’s 2020 Constitutional Decisions." The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference 104. (2022).
DOI: https://doi.org/10.60082/2563-8505.1423
https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/sclr/vol104/iss1/1

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

References

1 Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.), webcast online: https://scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=38585.

2 Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, S.C. 2018, c. 12, s. 186.

3 Over the past decade, the Court has heard between 57 and 85 appeals annually. For example, the Court heard 69 appeals in 2019. See Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 30, online: https://scc-csc.ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

4 Over the past decade, the Court has decided between 57 and 83 cases annually. In 2019, the Court issued 72 decisions. See Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 32, online: https://scc-csc.ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

5 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.); Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.).

6 British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Provincial Court Judges’ Association of British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 20, 2020 SCC 20 (S.C.C.); Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. Judges of the Provincial Court and Family Court of Nova Scotia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 21, 2020 SCC 21 (S.C.C.).

7 Newfoundland and Labrador (Attorney General) v. Uashaunnuat (Innu of Uashat and of Mani-Utenam), [2020] S.C.J. No. 4, 2020 SCC 4 (S.C.C.).

8 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11 [hereinafter “the Charter”].

9 R. v. K. (K.G.), [2020] S.C.J. No. 7, 2020 SCC 7 (S.C.C.); R. v. Thanabalasingham, [2020] S.C.J. No. 18, 2020 SCC 18 (S.C.C.); R. Chouhan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 101, 2021 SCC 26 (S.C.C.) (oral decision issued from the bench on October 7, 2020); R. v. Reilly, [2020] S.C.J. No. 27, 2020 SCC 27 (S.C.C.); Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

10 Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.); Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.).

11 Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.).

12 Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, [2020] S.C.J. No. 5, 2020 SCC 5 (S.C.C.).

13 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v. Pointes Protection Assn., [2020] S.C.J. No. 22, 2020 SCC 22 (S.C.C.) [hereinafter “Pointes Protection”].

14 Bent v. Platnick, [2020] S.C.J. No. 23, 2020 SCC 23 (S.C.C.).

15 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.). The Court was also unanimous in two rulings dealing with the right to be tried within a reasonable time protected by s. 11(b) of the Charter: see the brief unanimous opinion issued by “the Court” in R. v. Thanabalasingham, [2020] S.C.J. No. 18, 2020 SCC 18 (S.C.C.), agreeing with the Quebec Court of Appeal that the accused’s right to be tried within a reasonable time had been violated; and R. v. K. (K.G.), [2020] S.C.J. No. 7, 2020 SCC 7 (S.C.C.), a unanimous ruling (Moldaver J. writing for eight members of the Court and Abella J. writing a separate concurrence) finding that the accused’s right to be tried within a reasonable time had not been violated. See also the unanimous opinions written by Karakatsanis J. in two companion cases dealing with access to Cabinet documents in litigation involving the constitutionally-mandated process for setting judicial salaries: British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Provincial Court Judges’ Association of British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 20, 2020 SCC 20 (S.C.C.); Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. Judges of the Provincial Court and Family Court of Nova Scotia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 21, 2020 SCC 21 (S.C.C.).

16 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v. Pointes Protection Assn., [2020] S.C.J. No. 22, 2020 SCC 22 (S.C.C.).

17 Newfoundland and Labrador (Attorney General) v. Uashaunnuat (Innu of Uashat and of Mani-Utenam), [2020] S.C.J. No. 4, 2020 SCC 4 (S.C.C.) (5-4); Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.) (7-2); Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (5-4); R. v. Chouhan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 101, 2021 SCC 26 (S.C.C.) (7-2); oral decision issued from the bench on October 7, 2020); Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.) (6-3); Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.) (unanimous in result; 5-3 split on role of international and comparative law in Charter interpretation); Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.) (7-2). See also the Court’s constitutionally adjacent rulings in Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, [2020] S.C.J. No. 5, 2020 SCC 5 (S.C.C.) (5-4) and Bent v. Platnick, [2020] S.C.J. No. 23, 2020 SCC 23 (S.C.C.) (5-4).

18 Section 40(1) of the Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26 provides as follows: “an appeal lies to the Supreme Court. . . where, with respect to the particular case sought to be appealed, the Supreme Court is of the opinion that any question involved therein is, by reason of its public importance . . . one that ought to be decided by the Supreme Court . . . and leave to appeal from that judgment is accordingly granted by the Supreme Court.”

19 Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 29, online: https://scc-csc. ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

20 Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 29, online: https://scc-csc. ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

21 Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 691(1), (2).

22 Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26, s. 36.

23 The number of oral summary reasons delivered by the Court started increasing in 2014. Jamie Cameron noted that in 2018, the Court rendered oral reasons in 18 cases representing close to 30 per cent of the Court’s docket: Jamie Cameron, “A Chief and Court in Transition: The Wagner Court and the Constitution”, (2020) 94 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 3. The Court’s penchant for delivering oral summary reasons has attracted the ire of some members of the bar: see Frank Addario & James Foy, “The Supreme Court of Canada’s ‘new transparency’ is anything but” The Globe and Mail (December 16, 2018); Sean Fine, “Fast rulings from Supreme Court creating uncertainty about precedents it is setting, legal community says” The Globe and Mail (February 1, 2021).

24 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.).

25 R. v. Chouhan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 101, 2021 SCC 26 (S.C.C.) (decision delivered orally from the bench on October 7, 2020; written reasons followed later); R. v. Reilly, [2020] S.C.J. No. 27, 2020 SCC 27 (S.C.C.).

26 The 12 non-constitutional summary rulings delivered orally from the bench were: R. v. Doonanco, [2020] S.C.J. No. 2, 2020 SCC 2 (S.C.C.); R. v. Li, [2020] S.C.J. No. 12, 2020 SCC 12 (S.C.C.); R. v. Esseghaier, [2020] S.C.J. No. 102, 2021 SCC 9 (S.C.C.) (decision delivered orally from the bench on October 7, 2020; written reasons followed later); R. v. Riley, [2020] S.C.J. No. 31, 2020 SCC 31 (S.C.C.); R. v. Langan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 33, 2020 SCC 33 (S.C.C.); R. v. Kishayinew, [2020] S.C.J. No. 34, 2020 SCC 34 (S.C.C.); R. v. Slatter, [2020] S.C.J. No. 36, 2020 SCC 36 (S.C.C.); R. v. Delmas, [2020] S.C.J. No. 39, 2020 SCC 39 (S.C.C.); R. v. Mehari, [2020] S.C.J. No. 40, 2020 SCC 40 (S.C.C.); Co-operators General Insurance Co. v. Sollio Groupe Coopératif, [2020] S.C.J. No. 41, 2020 SCC 41 (S.C.C.); R. v. M. (W.), [2020] S.C.J. No. 42, 2020 SCC 42 (S.C.C.); R. v. Cortes Rivera, [2020] S.C.J. No. 44, 2020 SCC 44 (S.C.C.).

27 The only case decided summarily that had been granted leave was Co-operators General Insurance Co. v. Sollio Groupe Coopératif, [2020] S.C.J. No. 41, 2020 SCC 41 (S.C.C.).

28 R. v. Sheppard, [2002] S.C.J. No. 30, at para. 55, 2002 SCC 26 (S.C.C.).

29 Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, [2019] S.C.J. No. 65, 2019 SCC 65 (S.C.C.); Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] S.C.J. No. 39, [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817 (S.C.C.).

30 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2019] B.C.J. No. 925, 2019 BCCA 181 (B.C.C.A.), affd [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.).

31 Constitution Act, 1867, (U.K.) 30 & 31 Vict., c. 3 [reprinted in R.C.S. 1985, App. II, No. 5].

32 Factum of the Attorney General of Ontario, Court File No. 38682, at paras. 23-46, online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/38682/FM020_Intervener_AttorneyGeneral-of-Ontario.pdf.

33 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, at para. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.).

34 Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.). I served as co-counsel, along with Joseph Arvay, Michael Sobkin and William Colish, for the appellant the Canadian Coalition for Genetic Fairness.

35 Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.).

36 See the excellent symposium of papers on Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.) published in the Constitutional Forum: Jonnette Watson Hamilton, “Cautious Optimism: Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General)” (2021) 30:2 Const. Forum Const. 1; Fay Faraday, “The Elephant in the Room and Straw Men on Fire” (2021) 30:2 Const. Forum Const. 15; Jennifer Koshan, “Intersections and Roads Untravelled: Sex and Family Status in Fraser v. Canada” (2021) 30:2 Const. Forum Const. 15; Joshua Sealy-Harrington, “The Alchemy of Equality Rights” (2021) 30:2 Const. Forum Const. 53.

37 Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.).

38 Schachter v. Canada, [1992] S.C.J. No. 68, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 679 (S.C.C.).

39 References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, [2021] S.C.J. No. 11, 2021 SCC 11 (S.C.C.).

40 The previous leading statement on the parameters of the national concern branch was Le Dain J.’s majority opinion in R. v. Crown Zellerbach Canada Ltd., [1988] S.C.J. No. 23, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 401 (S.C.C.).

41 Sonia Lawrence, “Introduction – 2019 Constitutional Cases at the Supreme Court: Up Close and in Person” (2021) 100 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 3; Jamie Cameron, “A Chief and Court in Transition: The Wagner Court and the Constitution” (2020) 94 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 3.

42 Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 33, online: https://scc-csc. ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

43 Newfoundland and Labrador (Attorney General) v. Uashaunnuat (Innu of Uashat and of Mani-Utenam), [2020] S.C.J. No. 4, 2020 SCC 4 (S.C.C.) (5-4); Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.) (7-2); Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (5-4); R. v. Chouhan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 101, 2021 SCC 26 (S.C.C.) (7-2; oral decision issued from the bench on October 7, 2020); Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.) (6-3); Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.) (unanimous in result; 5-3 split on role of international and comparative law in Charter interpretation); Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.) (7-2). See also the Court’s constitutionally adjacent rulings in Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, [2020] S.C.J. No. 5, 2020 SCC 5 (S.C.C.) (5-4) and Bent v. Platnick, [2020] S.C.J. No. 23, 2020 SCC 23 (S.C.C.) (5-4).

44 See, e.g., Quebec (Attorney General) v. Alliance du personnel professional et technique de la santé et des services sociaux, [2018] S.C.J. No. 17, 2018 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (6-3); Centrale des syndicats du Québec v. Quebec (Attorney General), [2018] S.C.J. No. 18, 2018 SCC 18 (S.C.C.) (8-1, three separate opinions); Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University, [2018] S.C.J. No. 32, 2018 SCC 32 (S.C.C.) and Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [2018] S.C.J. No. 33, 2018 SCC 33 (S.C.C.) (7-2, four separate opinions); R. v. Boudreault, [2018] S.C.J. No. 58, 2018 SCC 58 (S.C.C.) (7-2); Frank v. Canada (Attorney General), [2019] S.C.J. No. 1, 2019 SCC 1 (S.C.C.) (5-2, three separate opinions).

45 References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, [2021] S.C.J. No. 11, 2021 SCC 11 (S.C.C.) (6-3); R. v. Desautel, [2021] S.C.J. No. 17, 2021 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (7-2); Toronto (City) v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2021] S.C.J. No. 34, 2021 SCC 34 (S.C.C.) (5-4).

46 Vanessa A. MacDonnell, “Justice Suzanne Côté’s Reputation as a Dissenter on the Supreme Court of Canada” (2019) 88 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 47.

47 Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.).

48 Bent v. Platnick, [2020] S.C.J. No. 23, 2020 SCC 23 (S.C.C.).

49 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

50 Toronto (City) v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2021] S.C.J. No. 34, 2021 SCC 34 (S.C.C.).

51 Reference re Assisted Human Reproduction Act, [2010] S.C.J. No. 61, 2010 SCC 61 (S.C.C.).

52 Newfoundland and Labrador (Attorney General) v. Uashaunnuat (Innu of Uashat and of Mani-Utenam), [2020] S.C.J. No. 4, 2020 SCC 4 (S.C.C.) (dissent co-authored by Brown and Rowe JJ., joined by Côté and Moldaver JJ.); Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, [2020] S.C.J. No. 5, 2020 SCC 5 (S.C.C.) (one dissent co-authored by Brown and Rowe JJ., another authored by Côté J., joined by Moldaver J.); Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.) (dissent co-authored by Brown and Rowe JJ.); Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (Brown and Rowe JJ. joined Kasirer J.’s dissenting opinion); Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.) (one dissent co-authored by Brown and Rowe JJ.; separate dissent authored by Côté J.); Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.) (co-authored dissent by Brown and Côté JJ.).

53 Philip Girard, Bora Laskin: Bringing Law to Life (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005), c. 20 “The Great Dissenter”, at 453-81.

54 See Marie-Claire Belleau, Rebecca Johnson & Christina Vinters, “Voicing an Opinion: Authorship, Collaboration and the Judgments of Justice Bertha Wilson” in Jamie Cameron, ed., Reflections on the Legacy of Justice Bertha Wilson (Markham, ON: LexisNexis Canada, 2008), at 409.

55 Constance Backhouse, Claire L’Heureux-Dubé: A Life (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2017), at 373-376 [hereinafter “The Great Dissenter”].

56 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

57 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at paras. 99-104, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

58 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 22, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.) [emphasis in original]. See also para. 28: “This Court has recognized a role for international and comparative law in interpreting Charter rights. However, this role has properly been to support or confirm an interpretation arrived at through the Big M Drug Mart [purposive] approach; the Court has never relied on such tools to define the scope of Charter rights.”

59 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at paras. 31-34, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

60 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 35, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

61 Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11.

62 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 41, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

63 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 42, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

64 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 27, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

65 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 46, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

66 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 47, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

67 Factum of the Intervener the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, Court File No. 38613, Gib van Ert and Jessica Magonet (January 9, 2020), online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/38613/FM040_Intervener_British-Columbia-Civil-Liberties-Association.pdf.

68 Factum of the Intervener the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, Court File No. 38613, Gib van Ert and Jessica Magonet (January 9, 2020), online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/38613/FM040_Intervener_British-Columbia-Civil-Liberties-Association.pdf, at para. 3.

69 Mr. van Ert’s submissions begin at 1:14:55 of the webcast of the oral hearing, online: https://scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=38613.

70 Mr. van Ert’s submissions at 1:18:07 of the webcast of the oral hearing, online: https://scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=38613.

71 Mémoire, Directrice des poursuites pénale, Numéro de dossier 38613, Mathieu Stanton et François Lacasse (January 8, 2020), online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/38613/FM080_Intervenante_Directrice-des-poursuites-p%C3%A9nales.pdf.

72 Mémoire, Directrice des poursuites pénale, Numéro de dossier 38613, Mathieu Stanton et François Lacasse (January 8, 2020), online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/ 38613/FM080_Intervenante_Directrice-des-poursuites-p%C3%A9nales.pdf, at paras. 7, 20, 31.

73 9147-0732 Québec inc. c. Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales, [2017] J.Q. no 16310, 2017 QCCS 5240 (Que. S.C.).

74 9147-0732 Québec inc. c. Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales, [2019] J.Q. no 1443, 2019 QCCA 373 (Que. C.A.).

75 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 47, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

76 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 142, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

77 Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Honouring the Truth, Reconciling the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015), at 190. See also the TRC’s Calls to Action 43 (UNDRIP implementation) and 44 (UNDRIP action plan).

78 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, S.B.C. 2019, c. 44.

79 An Act respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, S.C. 2021, c. 14.

80 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 42, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

81 References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, [2021] S.C.J. No. 11, 2021 SCC 11 (S.C.C.) (6-3 ruling; separate dissenting opinions written by Côté, Brown and Rowe JJ.); R. v. Desautel, [2021] S.C.J. No. 17, 2021 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (7-2 ruling; separate dissenting opinions written by Côté and Rowe JJ.); Toronto (City) v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2021] S.C.J. No. 34, 2021 SCC 34 (S.C.C.) (5-4 ruling; dissent written by Abella J.).

82 Online: https://www.fja-cmf.gc.ca/scc-csc/2021/nominee-candidat-eng.html.

83 Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys, [2006] S.C.J. No. 6, 2006 SCC 6 (S.C.C.).

84 Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony, [2009] S.C.J. No. 37, 2009 SCC 37 (S.C.C.).

85 R. v. Thompson, [2020] O.J. No. 1757, 2020 ONCA 264 (Ont. C.A.).

86 See Jamie Cameron, “A Chief and Court in Transition: The Wagner Court and the Constitution”, (2020) 94 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 3.

1 Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.), webcast online: https://scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=38585.

2 Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, S.C. 2018, c. 12, s. 186.

3 Over the past decade, the Court has heard between 57 and 85 appeals annually. For example, the Court heard 69 appeals in 2019. See Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 30, online: https://scc-csc.ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

4 Over the past decade, the Court has decided between 57 and 83 cases annually. In 2019, the Court issued 72 decisions. See Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 32, online: https://scc-csc.ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

5 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.)

Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.).

6 British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Provincial Court Judges' Association of British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 20, 2020 SCC 20 (S.C.C.)

Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. Judges of the Provincial Court and Family Court of Nova Scotia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 21, 2020 SCC 21 (S.C.C.).

7 Newfoundland and Labrador (Attorney General) v. Uashaunnuat (Innu of Uashat and of Mani-Utenam), [2020] S.C.J. No. 4, 2020 SCC 4 (S.C.C.).

8 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11 [hereinafter "the Charter"].

9 R. v. K. (K.G.), [2020] S.C.J. No. 7, 2020 SCC 7 (S.C.C.); R. v. Thanabalasingham, [2020] S.C.J. No. 18, 2020 SCC 18 (S.C.C.); R. Chouhan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 101, 2021 SCC 26 (S.C.C.) (oral decision issued from the bench on October 7, 2020); R. v. Reilly, [2020] S.C.J. No. 27, 2020 SCC 27 (S.C.C.); Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

10 Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.)

Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.).

11 Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.).

12 Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, [2020] S.C.J. No. 5, 2020 SCC 5 (S.C.C.).

13 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v. Pointes Protection Assn., [2020] S.C.J. No. 22, 2020 SCC 22 (S.C.C.) [hereinafter "Pointes Protection"].

14 Bent v. Platnick, [2020] S.C.J. No. 23, 2020 SCC 23 (S.C.C.).

15 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.). The Court was also unanimous in two rulings dealing with the right to be tried within a reasonable time protected by s. 11(b) of the Charter: see the brief unanimous opinion issued by "the Court" in R. v. Thanabalasingham, [2020] S.C.J. No. 18, 2020 SCC 18 (S.C.C.), agreeing with the Quebec Court of Appeal that the accused's right to be tried within a reasonable time had been violated

and R. v. K. (K.G.), [2020] S.C.J. No. 7, 2020 SCC 7 (S.C.C.), a unanimous ruling (Moldaver J. writing for eight members of the Court and Abella J. writing a separate concurrence) finding that the accused's right to be tried within a reasonable time had not been violated. See also the unanimous opinions written by Karakatsanis J. in two companion cases dealing with access to Cabinet documents in litigation involving the constitutionally-mandated process for setting judicial salaries: British Columbia (Attorney General) v. Provincial Court Judges' Association of British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 20, 2020 SCC 20 (S.C.C.)

Nova Scotia (Attorney General) v. Judges of the Provincial Court and Family Court of Nova Scotia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 21, 2020 SCC 21 (S.C.C.).

16 1704604 Ontario Ltd. v. Pointes Protection Assn., [2020] S.C.J. No. 22, 2020 SCC 22 (S.C.C.).

17 Newfoundland and Labrador (Attorney General) v. Uashaunnuat (Innu of Uashat and of Mani-Utenam), [2020] S.C.J. No. 4, 2020 SCC 4 (S.C.C.) (5-4); Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.) (7-2); Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (5-4); R. v. Chouhan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 101, 2021 SCC 26 (S.C.C.) (7-2); oral decision issued from the bench on October 7, 2020); Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.) (6-3); Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.) (unanimous in result; 5-3 split on role of international and comparative law in Charter interpretation); Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.) (7-2). See also the Court's constitutionally adjacent rulings in Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, [2020] S.C.J. No. 5, 2020 SCC 5 (S.C.C.) (5-4) and Bent v. Platnick, [2020] S.C.J. No. 23, 2020 SCC 23 (S.C.C.) (5-4).

18 Section 40(1) of the Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26 provides as follows: "an appeal lies to the Supreme Court. . . where, with respect to the particular case sought to be appealed, the Supreme Court is of the opinion that any question involved therein is, by reason of its public importance . . . one that ought to be decided by the Supreme Court . . . and leave to appeal from that judgment is accordingly granted by the Supreme Court."

19 Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 29, online: https://scc-csc. ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

20 Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 29, online: https://scc-csc. ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

21 Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 691(1), (2).

22 Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26, s. 36.

23 The number of oral summary reasons delivered by the Court started increasing in 2014. Jamie Cameron noted that in 2018, the Court rendered oral reasons in 18 cases representing close to 30 per cent of the Court's docket: Jamie Cameron, "A Chief and Court in Transition: The Wagner Court and the Constitution", (2020) 94 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 3. The Court's penchant for delivering oral summary reasons has attracted the ire of some members of the bar: see Frank Addario & James Foy, "The Supreme Court of Canada's 'new transparency' is anything but" The Globe and Mail (December 16, 2018); Sean Fine, "Fast rulings from Supreme Court creating uncertainty about precedents it is setting, legal community says" The Globe and Mail (February 1, 2021).

https://doi.org/10.60082/2563-8505.1374

24 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.).

25 R. v. Chouhan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 101, 2021 SCC 26 (S.C.C.) (decision delivered orally from the bench on October 7, 2020; written reasons followed later); R. v. Reilly, [2020] S.C.J. No. 27, 2020 SCC 27 (S.C.C.).

26 The 12 non-constitutional summary rulings delivered orally from the bench were: R. v. Doonanco, [2020] S.C.J. No. 2, 2020 SCC 2 (S.C.C.); R. v. Li, [2020] S.C.J. No. 12, 2020 SCC 12 (S.C.C.); R. v. Esseghaier, [2020] S.C.J. No. 102, 2021 SCC 9 (S.C.C.) (decision delivered orally from the bench on October 7, 2020; written reasons followed later); R. v. Riley, [2020] S.C.J. No. 31, 2020 SCC 31 (S.C.C.); R. v. Langan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 33, 2020 SCC 33 (S.C.C.); R. v. Kishayinew, [2020] S.C.J. No. 34, 2020 SCC 34 (S.C.C.); R. v. Slatter, [2020] S.C.J. No. 36, 2020 SCC 36 (S.C.C.); R. v. Delmas, [2020] S.C.J. No. 39, 2020 SCC 39 (S.C.C.); R. v. Mehari, [2020] S.C.J. No. 40, 2020 SCC 40 (S.C.C.); Co-operators General Insurance Co. v. Sollio Groupe Coopératif, [2020] S.C.J. No. 41, 2020 SCC 41 (S.C.C.); R. v. M. (W.), [2020] S.C.J. No. 42, 2020 SCC 42 (S.C.C.); R. v. Cortes Rivera, [2020] S.C.J. No. 44, 2020 SCC 44 (S.C.C.).

27 The only case decided summarily that had been granted leave was Co-operators General Insurance Co. v. Sollio Groupe Coopératif, [2020] S.C.J. No. 41, 2020 SCC 41 (S.C.C.).

28 R. v. Sheppard, [2002] S.C.J. No. 30, at para. 55, 2002 SCC 26 (S.C.C.).

https://doi.org/10.3917/pld.055.0026

29 Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, [2019] S.C.J. No. 65, 2019 SCC 65 (S.C.C.); Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] S.C.J. No. 39, [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817 (S.C.C.).

30 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2019] B.C.J. No. 925, 2019 BCCA 181 (B.C.C.A.), affd [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.).

31 Constitution Act, 1867, (U.K.) 30 & 31 Vict., c. 3 [reprinted in R.C.S. 1985, App. II, No. 5].

32 Factum of the Attorney General of Ontario, Court File No. 38682, at paras. 23-46, online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/38682/FM020_Intervener_AttorneyGeneral-of-Ontario.pdf.

33 Reference re Environmental Management Act (British Columbia), [2020] S.C.J. No. 1, at para. 1, 2020 SCC 1 (S.C.C.).

34 Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.). I served as co-counsel, along with Joseph Arvay, Michael Sobkin and William Colish, for the appellant the Canadian Coalition for Genetic Fairness.

35 Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.).

36 See the excellent symposium of papers on Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.) published in the Constitutional Forum: Jonnette Watson Hamilton, "Cautious Optimism: Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General)" (2021) 30:2 Const. Forum Const. 1

https://doi.org/10.21991/cf29418

Fay Faraday, "The Elephant in the Room and Straw Men on Fire" (2021) 30:2 Const. Forum Const. 15

https://doi.org/10.21991/cf29419

Jennifer Koshan, "Intersections and Roads Untravelled: Sex and Family Status in Fraser v. Canada" (2021) 30:2 Const. Forum Const. 15

https://doi.org/10.21991/cf29420

Joshua Sealy-Harrington, "The Alchemy of Equality Rights" (2021) 30:2 Const. Forum Const. 53.

https://doi.org/10.21991/cf29422

37 Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.).

38 Schachter v. Canada, [1992] S.C.J. No. 68, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 679 (S.C.C.).

https://doi.org/10.2307/2622709

39 References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, [2021] S.C.J. No. 11, 2021 SCC 11 (S.C.C.).

40 The previous leading statement on the parameters of the national concern branch was Le Dain J.'s majority opinion in R. v. Crown Zellerbach Canada Ltd., [1988] S.C.J. No. 23, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 401 (S.C.C.).

41 Sonia Lawrence, "Introduction - 2019 Constitutional Cases at the Supreme Court: Up Close and in Person" (2021) 100 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 3

https://doi.org/10.60082/2563-8505.1410

Jamie Cameron, "A Chief and Court in Transition: The Wagner Court and the Constitution" (2020) 94 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 3.

https://doi.org/10.60082/2563-8505.1374

42 Supreme Court of Canada, 2020 Year in Review (2021), at 33, online: https://scc-csc. ca/review-revue/2020/index-eng.aspx.

43 Newfoundland and Labrador (Attorney General) v. Uashaunnuat (Innu of Uashat and of Mani-Utenam), [2020] S.C.J. No. 4, 2020 SCC 4 (S.C.C.) (5-4); Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.) (7-2); Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (5-4); R. v. Chouhan, [2020] S.C.J. No. 101, 2021 SCC 26 (S.C.C.) (7-2; oral decision issued from the bench on October 7, 2020); Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.) (6-3); Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.) (unanimous in result; 5-3 split on role of international and comparative law in Charter interpretation); Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.) (7-2). See also the Court's constitutionally adjacent rulings in Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, [2020] S.C.J. No. 5, 2020 SCC 5 (S.C.C.) (5-4) and Bent v. Platnick, [2020] S.C.J. No. 23, 2020 SCC 23 (S.C.C.) (5-4).

44 See, e.g., Quebec (Attorney General) v. Alliance du personnel professional et technique de la santé et des services sociaux, [2018] S.C.J. No. 17, 2018 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (6-3)

Centrale des syndicats du Québec v. Quebec (Attorney General), [2018] S.C.J. No. 18, 2018 SCC 18 (S.C.C.) (8-1, three separate opinions)

Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University, [2018] S.C.J. No. 32, 2018 SCC 32 (S.C.C.) and Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [2018] S.C.J. No. 33, 2018 SCC 33 (S.C.C.) (7-2, four separate opinions)

R. v. Boudreault, [2018] S.C.J. No. 58, 2018 SCC 58 (S.C.C.) (7-2)

https://doi.org/10.1071/PVv2018n192p58

Frank v. Canada (Attorney General), [2019] S.C.J. No. 1, 2019 SCC 1 (S.C.C.) (5-2, three separate opinions).

45 References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, [2021] S.C.J. No. 11, 2021 SCC 11 (S.C.C.) (6-3)

R. v. Desautel, [2021] S.C.J. No. 17, 2021 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (7-2)

Toronto (City) v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2021] S.C.J. No. 34, 2021 SCC 34 (S.C.C.) (5-4).

46 Vanessa A. MacDonnell, "Justice Suzanne Côté's Reputation as a Dissenter on the Supreme Court of Canada" (2019) 88 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 47.

https://doi.org/10.60082/2563-8505.1360

47 Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.).

48 Bent v. Platnick, [2020] S.C.J. No. 23, 2020 SCC 23 (S.C.C.).

49 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

50 Toronto (City) v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2021] S.C.J. No. 34, 2021 SCC 34 (S.C.C.).

51 Reference re Assisted Human Reproduction Act, [2010] S.C.J. No. 61, 2010 SCC 61 (S.C.C.).

52 Newfoundland and Labrador (Attorney General) v. Uashaunnuat (Innu of Uashat and of Mani-Utenam), [2020] S.C.J. No. 4, 2020 SCC 4 (S.C.C.) (dissent co-authored by Brown and Rowe JJ., joined by Côté and Moldaver JJ.); Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, [2020] S.C.J. No. 5, 2020 SCC 5 (S.C.C.) (one dissent co-authored by Brown and Rowe JJ., another authored by Côté J., joined by Moldaver J.); Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique v. British Columbia, [2020] S.C.J. No. 13, 2020 SCC 13 (S.C.C.) (dissent co-authored by Brown and Rowe JJ.); Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act, [2020] S.C.J. No. 17, 2020 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (Brown and Rowe JJ. joined Kasirer J.'s dissenting opinion); Fraser v. Canada (Attorney General), [2020] S.C.J. No. 28, 2020 SCC 28 (S.C.C.) (one dissent co-authored by Brown and Rowe JJ.; separate dissent authored by Côté J.); Ontario (Attorney General) v. G., [2020] S.C.J. No. 38, 2020 SCC 38 (S.C.C.) (co-authored dissent by Brown and Côté JJ.).

53 Philip Girard, Bora Laskin: Bringing Law to Life (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005), c. 20 "The Great Dissenter", at 453-81.

https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442671522

54 See Marie-Claire Belleau, Rebecca Johnson & Christina Vinters, "Voicing an Opinion: Authorship, Collaboration and the Judgments of Justice Bertha Wilson" in Jamie Cameron, ed., Reflections on the Legacy of Justice Bertha Wilson (Markham, ON: LexisNexis Canada, 2008), at 409.

55 Constance Backhouse, Claire L'Heureux-Dubé: A Life (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2017), at 373-376 [hereinafter "The Great Dissenter"].

56 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

57 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at paras. 99-104, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

58 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 22, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.) [emphasis in original]. See also para. 28: "This Court has recognized a role for international and comparative law in interpreting Charter rights. However, this role has properly been to support or confirm an interpretation arrived at through the Big M Drug Mart [purposive] approach; the Court has never relied on such tools to define the scope of Charter rights."

59 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at paras. 31-34, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

60 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 35, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

61 Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11.

62 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 41, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

63 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 42, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

64 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 27, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

65 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 46, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

66 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 47, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

67 Factum of the Intervener the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, Court File No. 38613, Gib van Ert and Jessica Magonet (January 9, 2020), online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/38613/FM040_Intervener_British-Columbia-Civil-Liberties-Association.pdf.

68 Factum of the Intervener the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, Court File No. 38613, Gib van Ert and Jessica Magonet (January 9, 2020), online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/38613/FM040_Intervener_British-Columbia-Civil-Liberties-Association.pdf, at para. 3.

69 Mr. van Ert's submissions begin at 1:14:55 of the webcast of the oral hearing, online: https://scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=38613.

70 Mr. van Ert's submissions at 1:18:07 of the webcast of the oral hearing, online: https://scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=38613.

71 Mémoire, Directrice des poursuites pénale, Numéro de dossier 38613, Mathieu Stanton et François Lacasse (January 8, 2020), online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/38613/FM080_Intervenante_Directrice-des-poursuites-p%C3%A9nales.pdf.

72 Mémoire, Directrice des poursuites pénale, Numéro de dossier 38613, Mathieu Stanton et François Lacasse (January 8, 2020), online: https://scc-csc.ca/WebDocuments-DocumentsWeb/ 38613/FM080_Intervenante_Directrice-des-poursuites-p%C3%A9nales.pdf, at paras. 7, 20, 31.

73 9147-0732 Québec inc. c. Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales, [2017] J.Q. no 16310, 2017 QCCS 5240 (Que. S.C.).

74 9147-0732 Québec inc. c. Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales, [2019] J.Q. no 1443, 2019 QCCA 373 (Que. C.A.).

75 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 47, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

76 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 142, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

77 Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Honouring the Truth, Reconciling the Future: Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015), at 190. See also the TRC's Calls to Action 43 (UNDRIP implementation) and 44 (UNDRIP action plan).

78 Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, S.B.C. 2019, c. 44.

79 An Act respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, S.C. 2021, c. 14.

80 Quebec (Attorney General) v. 9147-0732 Québec inc., [2020] S.C.J. No. 32, at para. 42, 2020 SCC 32 (S.C.C.).

81 References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, [2021] S.C.J. No. 11, 2021 SCC 11 (S.C.C.) (6-3 ruling; separate dissenting opinions written by Côté, Brown and Rowe JJ.); R. v. Desautel, [2021] S.C.J. No. 17, 2021 SCC 17 (S.C.C.) (7-2 ruling; separate dissenting opinions written by Côté and Rowe JJ.); Toronto (City) v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2021] S.C.J. No. 34, 2021 SCC 34 (S.C.C.) (5-4 ruling; dissent written by Abella J.).

82 Online: https://www.fja-cmf.gc.ca/scc-csc/2021/nominee-candidat-eng.html.

83 Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys, [2006] S.C.J. No. 6, 2006 SCC 6 (S.C.C.).

84 Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony, [2009] S.C.J. No. 37, 2009 SCC 37 (S.C.C.).

85 R. v. Thompson, [2020] O.J. No. 1757, 2020 ONCA 264 (Ont. C.A.).

86 See Jamie Cameron, "A Chief and Court in Transition: The Wagner Court and the Constitution", (2020) 94 Sup. Ct. L. Rev. (2d) 3. https://doi.org/10.60082/2563-8505.1374