Consult the Court, says the Court

Today the Supreme Court ruled that equality rights were subordinate to the financial outlooks of the governments that were charged with respecting them.

Top court sides with Nfld. in pay equity case

“The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled the government of Newfoundland and Labrador was justified in deferring pay-equity payments to female hospital workers.
…
Today, in a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court said the decision may have violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but the provincial government was nevertheless justified in deferring the payments.

“The spring of 1991 was not a ‘normal’ time in the finances of the provincial government,” Justice Ian Binnie wrote.

He said there comes a time when budget problems “can attain a dimension that elected governments must be accorded significant scope to take remedial measures, even if the measures taken have an adverse effect on a Charter right.”

However, he cautioned that governments must still prove that they are facing a fiscal crisis.”

A fairly commonsensical ruling. After all, if a government doesn’t have the cash, then it really doesn’t have the cash.

But this leaves open the question: What counts as an “exceptional” situation when governments don’t have to respect equality rights? In this case, Newfoundland did. But how do we determine when an exceptional case arises?

The answer? Consult the courts. This is a question which will need lots and lots of jurisprudence and precedent before an answer can be reached…only to be over-turned by a panel of the next crop of Supreme Court justices. Can’t you hear lawyers rubbing their hands together in glee as you read this?

That having been said, it is nice to see the Court Party take a hit. Seems like they’re not taking it too well, either.