You are on page 1of 2

Canadian Bill of Rights vs.

The
Canadian Charter of Rights

Case 1

Big M Drug Mart was charged with violating the Lords Day act. The business challenged
the charge with an argument saying it is not part of the Federal Jurisdiction over the criminal
law, and that it violated section 2(a) of the Canadian Charter of Rights. The cases was accepted
by the provincial court, and dismissed the charges. They court also decided that the Lord's Day
Act to be of no effect anymore. It was appealed once more by the Attorney general of Alberta.
The court of appeal rejected the argument of Federal Jurisdiction, but agreed that the Lord's day
act did in face infringe on rights of freedom of religion.

Case

Robinson and Rosetanni were convicted for running their bowling alley business on a
Sunday. They took their case to the supreme court of Canada. The appeal was dismissed.

Charter of Rights Bill Of Rights

Decision Case was appealed and Case was dismissed


charges were
dropped.

The government looked at When the government looked


Reason the charter and at the case, they turned to the
considered that the freedom Bill of Rights for reasoning.
of right of religion. They They interpreted the Bill as
realized that the Lords day freedom of religion means
was an infringement on rights you do not have to conform to
for non-Christians. The religious doctrines. But you
Freedom of rights of religion cannot do so if it breaks
mean you are able to believe the law.
in anything you would like
without any restriction, and
you are allowed to not believe
in thing that you occur. The
Lords day was a Christian
based day, thus constraining
Canadians rights.