Sentences with phrase «impaired charter rights»

CCLA made submissions to Parliament and the Senate on the new legislative provisions, and will continue to intervene in national security cases that have unjustifiably impaired Charter rights.

The Attorney General failed to establish that ``... retrospective application of the Abolition of Early Parole Act serves a pressing and substantial government objective, is rationally connected to that objective, minimally impairs the Charter right, and that its salutary benefits outweigh its detrimental effects.»

This onus is met if: a connection exists between the measure and the objectives so that the former can not be said to be arbitrary, unfair or irrational; the measure impairs the Charter right or freedom no more than necessary; and the effects of the measure are not so severe as to constitute an unacceptable abridgement of the right or freedom.

Once any limitation on a Charter protected right is found, it can only be justified if (i) it is prescribed by law, (ii) it relates to a pressing and substantial objective, (iii) the impugned provision must be rationally connected to the objective, (iv) it must impair the Charter right «minimally» and (v) the effects must be proportional.

If Parliament prohibits vouching, then the government may no longer be able to establish that the rules minimally impair the Charter right to vote, since vouching will no longer allow voters who lack the required identity documents to cast ballots.

Where the stricter rules might falter — and where the effect of Bill C - 23 may prove to be unconstitutional — is in the final two steps; courts may ultimately find that, without vouching, the voter - identification restrictions do not minimally impair the Charter right to vote, nor do their salutary benefits outweigh their deleterious effects.

Not exact matches

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self - defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.

Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self - defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.

Serious matters should be tried on their merits and impaired driving is one of those matters, but not if the Charter breach is serious and the denial of right to counsel in these circumstances is such that, in my view, to admit the evidence following the breach would do more to bring the administration of justice into disrepute than to admit it.

Ms Jodhan sought a declaration under section 18.1 of the Federal Courts Act that the standards implemented by the federal government for providing visually impaired Canadians with access to government information and services on the Internet, and the way in which those standards are implemented, denied her equal access to government information and services, and thereby violated her rights under section 15 (1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms... rights under section 15 (1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms... Rights and Freedoms... [more]

According to yesterday's news (see here for an article from the National Post), the government of New Brunswick will be asking the Supreme Court of Canada to look into the status of its language laws as it appeals the decision of its appellate court upholding the decision of a provincial judge who excluded breath - sample evidence of a suspected impaired driver pursuant to s. 24 (2) of the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms because his language rights had been violated (see R. v. Losier, 2011 NBCA 102 (CanLII)Rights and Freedoms because his language rights had been violated (see R. v. Losier, 2011 NBCA 102 (CanLII)rights had been violated (see R. v. Losier, 2011 NBCA 102 (CanLII)-RRB-.

In another case earlier this month, a man was found not guilty of having care or control of a vehicle while impaired by a drug when Justice Scott Latimer threw out the evidence after ruling that police had violated his Charter rights.

The Ontario Court of Justice has recently excluded significant evidence in two criminal cases involving impaired driving after ruling that police had violated the accuseds» Charter rights by failing to immediately inform them of their right to counsel.

An alleged impaired driver has won a retrial after her lawyer failed to consider whether her Charter rights were violated by a video taken while she was going to the toilet.

Keywords: Criminal Law, Impaired Driving Causing Bodily Harm, Evidence, Credibility, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, sections 8 and 10 (a)