According to a recent ruling by Canada’s highest court, the state does not have full immunity if adopted legislation is later found to be unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court’s decision on July 19 stated, “The state may be required to pay damages for making unconstitutional legislation if it is clearly unconstitutional, or was in bad faith or an abuse of power.” You can read the full case brief for more details.
In a 5–4 majority decision co-written by Chief Justice Richard Wagner, the court ruled in the case of Canada (Attorney General) v. Power.
The case involved Joseph Power, who was convicted of two offences in 1996 and later faced challenges due to retroactive laws passed in 2010 and 2012 that made him ineligible for a record suspension. This affected his ability to work in his profession in New Brunswick and Quebec.
Mr. Power sued the federal government in 2018, alleging the unconstitutional nature of the laws enacted in 2010 and 2012. He sought damages under section 24(1) of the Charter, claiming the legislation was enacted “bad faith, abusively, and with knowledge of its unconstitutionality.”
Section 24 of the Charter allows individuals to seek remedies when their rights are infringed upon.
The Supreme Court acknowledged that the laws from 2010 and 2012 had been deemed unconstitutional by other courts, a position supported by the attorney general.
Can you please rephrase this?
Source link
