View cases - Stewart McKelvey

Page: 48i) The Section 1 Analytical Framework[187] As was previously noted, the parties agree that the Oakes test should be applied by the Courtin determining whether paragraph 15(1)(c) of the CHRA is saved by section 1 of the Charter. Inorder to satisfy this test, Air Canada and ACPA must demonstrate that:(1) the objective of the legislation is pressing and substantial; andthat(2) the impairment of the right is proportional to the importance ofthe objective in that(a) the means chosen are rationally connected to thelegislative objective;(b) the means chosen impairs the Charter rightminimally or “as little as possible”; and(c) there is a proportionality between any deleteriouseffects of the legislation and its salutary objective, sothat the attainment of the legislative goal is notoutweighed by the abridgment of the right inquestion.2011 FC 120 (CanLII)See Oakes at paras. 69 and 70. See also R. v. Edwards Books & Art Ltd., [1986] 2 S.C.R. 713,[1986] S.C.J. No. 70 (QL); RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1995] 3 S.C.R.199, [1995] S.C.J. No. 68; Irwin Toy v. Québec (Attorney General), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927, [1989]S.C.J. No. 36.[188] The starting point of a section 1 inquiry is to identify the objectives of the law, in order todetermine whether these objectives are sufficiently important as to warrant the limitation of aconstitutional right: see Stoffman, above, at para. 50.[189] In order to identify the objectives of the law, the Court must examine the nature of the socialproblem that the legislation addresses. The context of the impugned legislation “is also important inorder to determine the type of proof which a court can demand of the legislator to justify its