Ontario (Attorney General) v. Canada Temperance Federation
Encyclopedia
Ontario v. Canada Temperance Federation (1946) was a famous Canadian constitutional decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
and was among the first cases to examine the peace, order, and good government (p.o.g.g.) power of the Constitution Act, 1867
. This was the first decision to bring back the "national concerns" branch of peace, order, and good government since it was first suggested in the Local Prohibitions case.
which examined whether the federal Canada Temperance Act
(1927) was valid. Haldane, in Toronto Electric Commissions v. Snider, provided for a very narrow use of the p.o.g.g. power in the context of emergencies.
, for the Council, upheld the ruling in Russel, but also suggested that p.o.g.g. could be invoked for matters of "national concern":
This became the foundation of the "national dimensions" test.
The "national concern" test was subsequently applied and elaborated on in Johannesson v. West St. Paul
, Munro v. National Capital Commission
, and R. v. Crown Zellerbach.
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council is one of the highest courts in the United Kingdom. Established by the Judicial Committee Act 1833 to hear appeals formerly heard by the King in Council The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) is one of the highest courts in the United...
and was among the first cases to examine the peace, order, and good government (p.o.g.g.) power of the Constitution Act, 1867
Constitution Act, 1867
The Constitution Act, 1867 , is a major part of Canada's Constitution. The Act created a federal dominion and defines much of the operation of the Government of Canada, including its federal structure, the House of Commons, the Senate, the justice system, and the taxation system...
. This was the first decision to bring back the "national concerns" branch of peace, order, and good government since it was first suggested in the Local Prohibitions case.
Background
Here, the Council revisited the issue dealt with in Russell v. The QueenRussell v. The Queen
Russell v. The Queen is a landmark Privy Council decision regarding the interpretation of the Canadian Constitution Act, 1867, and was one of the first cases explaining the interpretation of peace, order and good government....
which examined whether the federal Canada Temperance Act
Canada Temperance Act
The Canada Temperance Act was an Act of the Parliament of Canada in 1878, which provided for an option for municipalities to opt-in by plebiscite to a prohibitionary scheme...
(1927) was valid. Haldane, in Toronto Electric Commissions v. Snider, provided for a very narrow use of the p.o.g.g. power in the context of emergencies.
Opinion of the Council
Viscount SimonViscount Simon
Viscount Simon, of Stackpole Elidor in the County of Pembroke, is a title in the Peerage of the United Kingdom. It was created in 1940 for the Liberal politician Sir John Simon. He was Home Secretary from 1915 to 1916 and 1935 to 1937, Foreign Secretary from 1931 to 1935, Chancellor of the...
, for the Council, upheld the ruling in Russel, but also suggested that p.o.g.g. could be invoked for matters of "national concern":
- In their Lordships' opinion, the true test must be found in the real subject matter of the legislation: if it is such that it goes beyond local or provincial concern or interests and must from its inherent nature be the concern of the Dominion as a whole (as, for example, in the Aeronautics case and the Radio case), then it will fall within the competence of the Dominion Parliament as a matter affecting the peace, order and good government of Canada, though it may in another aspect touch on matters specially reserved to the provincial legislatures.
This became the foundation of the "national dimensions" test.
Aftermath
Many decisions to follow struggled to reconcile this case with that of Russell, which seem to give contradictory interpretations of the p.o.g.g. power. Though not stated by Simon, the decision effectively overturned Russell.The "national concern" test was subsequently applied and elaborated on in Johannesson v. West St. Paul
Johannesson v. West St. Paul
Johannesson v. Rural Municipality West St. Paul [1952] 1 S.C.R. 297 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the federal jurisdiction over aeronautics...
, Munro v. National Capital Commission
Munro v. National Capital Commission
Munro v. National Capital Commission [1966] S.C.R. 663 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the federal peace, order, and good government power, where the Court held that the zoning, expropriation and renovation of land within the National Capital Region, in the vicinity of Ottawa, is a...
, and R. v. Crown Zellerbach.
See also
- List of Judicial Committee of the Privy Council cases
- Ontario Temperance ActOntario Temperance ActOntario Temperance Act was a law passed in Ontario in 1916 to prohibit the sale of alcohol, a period known as Prohibition. This meant the province remained dry in legal terms, but smugglers continued to import alcohol into the province. The cause was the demand of religious elements led by women...