|
Charter - s.7 Arbitrariness. R. v. Robertson
In R. v. Robertson (Ont CA, 2026) the Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed a criminal appeal, here where the defendant argued that "the THC limit [SS: under CCC s.320.14(3) 'Operation while impaired - Operation causing death'] violated s. 7 of the Charter because it could capture drivers who were not actually impaired.".
Here the court considers the Charter s.7 element of arbitrariness:2. No Arbitrariness
[30] The THC limit is not arbitrary because it is capable of advancing its legislative objectives: Carter v. Canada (Attorney General), 2015 SCC 5, [2015] 1 S.C.R. 331, at para. 83. As the trial judge found, the use of THC blood concentration thresholds assists in detecting recent cannabis consumption which, in turn, is closely associated with impairment. This enhanced capacity for detection supports Parliament’s deterrence objective, as the increased likelihood of enforcement discourages individuals from engaging in the prohibited conduct: R. v. Thomsen, 1988 CanLII 73 (SCC), [1988] 1 S.C.R. 640, at p. 655. . R. v. Kloubakov
In R. v. Kloubakov (SCC, 2025) the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed a criminal appeal, this from an Alberta CA ruling that allowed a Crown appeal against an Alberta QB decision in which "the trial judge held that these offences [SS: 'receiving a material benefit from sexual services and of procuring': CCC 286.2 and 286.3] prohibited the safety measures contemplated in Bedford [SS: Canada (Attorney General) v. Bedford (SCC, 2013)] and therefore infringed s. 7 of the Charter".
Here the court considers the Charter s,7 issue of 'arbitrariness':[138] A law is arbitrary if “there is no connection between the effect and the object of the law” (Bedford, at para. 98; see also paras. 99-100). A law will be considered arbitrary for the purposes of s. 7 if it imposes limits on life, liberty, or security of the person “that have no connection to [the law’s] purpose” (R. v. Smith, 2015 SCC 34, [2015] 2 S.C.R. 602, at para. 23; P. W. Hogg and W. K. Wright, Constitutional Law of Canada (5th ed. Supp.), at § 47:24; H. Brun, G. Tremblay and E. Brouillet, Droit constitutionnel (6th ed. 2014), at para. XII-6.66).
|
