LWSO5001 Lecture Notes - Lecture 8: Determinative, Comparator
Document Summary
Kapp continued, comparator groups i. p. 1327-1335 ii. Court abandoned its commitment to human dignity as a legal test for determining whether a law is discriminatory. In its place, the court held that the perpetuation of prejudice or stereotyping renders a distinction discriminatory. Mclachlin suggests that distinctions that have the effect of perpetuating disadvantage can also constitute discrimination. Ermineskin indian band v canada (2009 scc) suggests a willingness by the court to understand prejudice in fiscal or financial terms. Ac v manitoba (director of child and family services) (2009 scc) section 25(9) of the. Manitoba child and family services act states that the best interests of a child 16 or over will be most effectively promoted by allowing the child"s views to be determinative. When the child is under 16, no such presumption exsits. Abella j held that the provisions do not violate s. 15 because the distinction is ameliorative, not invidious.
