R. v. CKOY Ltd., (1978) 24 N.R. 254 (SCC)

• Judge: Laskin, C.J.C., Martland, Ritchie, Spence, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz, Estey and Pratte, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: October 03, 1978
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1978), 24 N.R. 254 (SCC);90 DLR (3d) 1;24 NR 254;[1979] 1 SCR 2;40 CPR (2d) 1;43 CCC (2d) 1;1978 CanLII 40 (SCC)

R. v. CKOY Ltd. (1978), 24 N.R. 254 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. CKOY Ltd.

Indexed As: R. v. CKOY Ltd.

Supreme Court of Canada

Laskin, C.J.C., Martland, Ritchie, Spence, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz, Estey and Pratte, JJ.

October 3, 1978.

Summary:

This case arose out of a charge against a radio station of violating s. 5 of the Broadcasting Act Regulations. Section 5 prohibited a radio station from broadcasting an interview of a person without the consent of the person. At trial the radio station alleged that s. 5 of the Broadcasting Act Regulations was not authorized by the Broadcasting Act. The trial court acquitted the accused. The Crown appealed by way of stated case to the Ontario Supreme Court.

The Ontario Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. The Crown appealed to the Ontario Court of Appeal.

The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ordered that the accused be convicted. The accused appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court of Canada held that the regulation in question was validly enacted pursuant to a statutory duty to develop a high programming standard (see paragraphs 9 and 10).

Laskin, C.J.C., Martland and Estey, JJ., dissenting, in the Supreme Court of Canada, would have allowed the appeal and would have restored the acquittal of the accused. Martland, J., stated that the regulation in question did not relate to programming standards (see paragraphs 15 to 28).

Telecommunications - Topic 1523

Radio - Regulation of program content - Whether regulation intra vires - Validity of Broadcasting Act Regulation, s. 5(1) - A radio station was charged with violating a regulation (enacted under the Broadcasting Act) which prohibited a station from broadcasting an interview of a person without the consent of the person - The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the conviction of the accused - The Supreme Court of Canada held that such a regulation was validly enacted pursuant to a statutory duty to develop a high programming standard (see paragraphs 9 and 10).

Cases Noticed:

Capital Cities Communications Inc. et al. v. Canadian Radio-Television Commission et al., 18 N.R. 181; [1978] 2 S.C.R. 141, refd to. [para. 12].

Canada Metal Co. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp., [1974] 3 O.R.(2d) 1, folld. [para. 13].

Statutes Noticed:

Broadcasting Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. B-11, sect. 3, sect. 5, sect. 15, sect. 16 [para. 4].

Broadcasting Act Regulations, sect. 5(1) [para. 5].

Canadian Bill of Rights, R.S.C. 1970, App. III, sect. 1(d), sect. 2 [para. 13].

Counsel:

Gordon Henderson, Q.C. and Wayne B. Spooner, for the appellant, CKOY Ltd.;

Claude Thomson, Q.C. and Gavin MacKenzie, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard by LASKIN, C.J.C., MARTLAND, RITCHIE, SPENCE, PIGEON, DICKSON, BEETZ, ESTEY and PRATTE, JJ. of the Supreme Court of Canada at Ottawa, Ontario on May 17, 1978.

The judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada was delivered on October 3, 1978 and the following opinions were filed:

SPENCE, J. - see paragraphs 1 to 14.

MARTLAND, J., dissenting - see paragraphs 15 to 28.

RITCHIE, PIGEON, DICKSON, BEETZ and PRATTE, JJ. concurred with SPENCE, J.

LASKIN, C.J.C., and ESTEY, J. concurred with MARTLAND, J.