Parkdale Hotel Ltd. v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) et al., (1986) 1 F.T.R. 190 (TD)

• Judge: Joyal, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: March 20, 1985
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1986), 1 F.T.R. 190 (TD)

Parkdale Hotel Ltd. v. Can. (1986), 1 F.T.R. 190 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Parkdale Hotel Limited v. The Attorney General of Canada and The Chief Electoral Officer of Canada

(T-1738-84)

Indexed As: Parkdale Hotel Ltd. v. Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) et al.

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Joyal, J.

January 30, 1986.

Summary:

Frimeth, who was shareholder and director of a hotel, and the hotel brought an action to test the constitutional validity of s. 67 of the Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1970 (1st Supp.), c. 14. Section 67 prohibited the dispensation of liquor during polling hours on election day. Frimeth and the hotel argued that s. 67 was unconstitutional because it was ultra vires the jurisdiction of the Federal Parliament, it was contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 6(2)(b), 7 and 15, and contrary to s. 1 of the Canadian Bill of Rights. The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the action, holding that s. 67 was valid.

Civil Rights - Topic 503

Mobility rights - Right to work in any province - Section 67 of the Canada Elections Act prohibited, inter alia, the dispensation of liquor during polling hours on election day - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that s. 67 did not deprive a hotel owner, whose hotel sold liquor, of her right to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province as guaranteed by s. 6(2)(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - See paragraphs 46, 47.

Civil Rights - Topic 726

Liberty - Charter - Denial of liberty - What constitutes - Section 67 of the Canada Elections Act prohibited, inter alia, the dispensation of liquor during polling hours on election day - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that s. 67 did not deprive a hotel owner, whose hotel sold liquor, of her right to liberty as guaranteed by s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - The court held that s. 7 was restricted to the legal right to physical liberty as opposed to an economic right to a free exercise of commercial activity - See paragraphs 50 to 53.

Civil Rights - Topic 908

Discrimination - Laws not discriminatory - Canada Elections Act, s. 67 - Prohibition on dispensation of liquor during polling hours - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that s. 67 did not deprive a hotel owner, whose hotel sold liquor, of her right to be equal before the law as guaranteed by s. 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms - See paragraphs 54 to 71.

Civil Rights - Topic 5502

Equality and protection of the law - Whether right to equality abridged - Section 67 of the Canada Elections Act prohibited, inter alia, the dispensation of liquor during polling hours on election day - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that s. 67 was not contrary to s. 1(b) of the Canadian Bill of Rights (the right of the individual to equality before the law and protection of the law) - See paragraphs 38 to 45.

Civil Rights - Topic 5502

Equality and protection of the law - Whether right to equality abridged - The Canada Elections Act, s. 67, prohibited, inter alia, the dispensation of liquor during polling hours on election day - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that s. 67 did not deprive a hotel owner, whose hotel sold liquor, of the right to equality before the law as guaranteed by s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - See paragraphs 54 to 71.

Civil Rights - Topic 8000

Canadian Bill of Rights - General principles - Application - Persons protected - Corporations - The Canadian Bill of Rights, s. 1(b), guaranteed the rights of individuals to equality before the law and the protection of the law - The Federal Court, Trial Division, stated that the word individual in s. 1 was limited to physical persons and therefore did not include corporations - See paragraph 45.

Civil Rights - Topic 8305

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application of - Persons protected - Corporations - The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 6, gave certain mobility rights to citizens and permanent residents of Canada - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that corporations were not within the ambit of the protection in s. 6 - See paragraphs 48, 49.

Civil Rights - Topic 8305

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application of - Persons protected - Corporations - The Charter, s. 15, provided that every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that the protection of s. 15 extended only to physical persons and not corporations - See paragraphs 56 to 64.

Civil Rights - Topic 8305

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application of - Persons protected - Shareholders and directors of corporations - The Charter, s. 15, provided that every individual is equal before and under the law and has a right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that the protection of s. 15 did not extend to corporations, but held that a director and shareholder of a corporation had status to complain that a law affecting the corporation violated s. 15 - See paragraphs 56 to 67.

Constitutional Law - Topic 4713

Peace, order and good government clause - Particular legislative purposes - Elections - Section 67 of the Canada Elections Act prohibited, inter alia, the dispensation of liquor during polling hours on election day - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that s. 67 was validly enacted by the Federal Government under its power in s. 91 of the Constitution Act, 1867, to pass laws for the peace, order and good government of the country - See paragraphs 30 to 45.

Practice - Topic 650

Parties - Adding or substituting - Plaintiffs - General - The owner of a hotel challenged the constitutional validity of s. 67 of the Canada Elections Act which prohibited the dispensation of liquor during polling hours - Before trial the hotel owner died - His wife desired to continue the action, so as beneficiary of her husband's estate and as director and shareholder of the hotel she applied to be added as a party-plaintiff - The Federal Court, Trial Division, allowed her application but noted that the granting of the motion was not a bar to the Federal Crown raising the issue of status at any stage of the trial or argument - See paragraphs 4 to 7.

Words and Phrases

Individual - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that the word "individual" as it appeared in s. 1 of the Canadian Bill of Rights was limited to physical persons - See paragraph 45.

Words and Phrases

Individual - The Federal Court, Trial Division, held that the word "individual" in s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms extended only to physical persons and not corporations - See paragraphs 56 to 64.

Cases Noticed:

Thorson v. Attorney General of Canada, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 138; 1 N.R. 225, refd to. [para. 6].

Minister of Justice of Canada v. Borowski, [1981] 2 S.C.R. 575; 35 N.R. 626, refd to. [para. 6].

Russell v. R. (1882), 7 App. Cas. 829, consd. [para. 30].

Attorney General for Ontario v. Attorney General for Canada, [1896] A.C. 348, refd to. [para. 31].

A.-G. Ont. v. Canada Temperance Federation, [1946] A.C. 193, consd. [para. 32].

Re C.F.R.B. Ltd. and Attorney-General of Canada et al. (No. 2) (1972), 30 D.L.R.(3d) 279, consd. [para. 40].

R. v. MacKay, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 370; 33 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 42].

R. v. Colgate Palmolive Ltd. (1971), 8 C.C.C.(2d) 40, folld. [para. 45].

Skapinker v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 357; 53 N.R. 169; 3 O.A.C. 321; 11 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 9 D.L.R.(4th) 161; 8 C.R.R. 193, refd to. [para. 47].

R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al. (1984), 5 O.A.C. 1; 9 C.R.R. 193, refd to. [para. 52].

Balderstone v. R. and Manitoba, Attorney General of, Play-All Limited, Nellis and Bricker v. Penner, Manitoba, Attorney General of and R. (1982), 19 Man.R.(2d) 321; 143 D.L.R. (3d) 671 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 56].

Re Jones and R. (1985), 20 C.C.C.(3d) 91 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 61].

R. v. Kane (Stafford Assizes), [1965] 1 All E.R. 705, refd to. [para. 70].

Anderson v. Anderson, [1895] 1 Q.B. 749, refd to. [para. 70].

Statutes Noticed:

Canada Elections Act, R.S.C. 1970 (1st Supp.), c. 14, sect. 67.

Canadian Bill of Rights, R.S.C. 1970, App. III, sect. 1 [para. 38].

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, sect. 6 [para. 46]; sect. 7 [para. 50]; sect. 15 [para. 54].

Constitution Act, 1867, sect. 91 [paras. 30 to 37].

Federal Court Rules, rule 2(2) [para. 7].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Craies on Statute Law (7th Ed., 1971), p. 181 [para. 70].

Tarnopolsky and Beaudoin, The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms: Commentary (1982), pp. 29 [para. 24]; 263 [para. 51].

Counsel:

Appearances: M.M. Green, Q.C., for the plaintiff;

M.W. Duffy, for the defendant.

Solicitors of Record:

Green and Spiegel, Toronto, Ontario, for the plaintiff;

Frank Iacobucci, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General of Canada, for the defendant.

This case was heard at Toronto, Ontario, on March 20, 1985, before Joyal, J., who delivered the following decision on January 30, 1986: