Scowby v. Glendinning
Encyclopedia
Scowby v. Glendinning, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 226 is a leading federalism decision of the Supreme Court of Canada
. The Saskatchewan provincial Human Rights Act was found not to apply to potentially discriminatory conduct that was acted as part of criminal law enforcement.
in his hunting cabin for the assault of a conservation officer. The suspects were made to lay on the ground without being dressed in sub-zero temperature for approximately half an hour. They were eventually released.
Runns and his associates made a complaint to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission for arbitrary arrest. A Board of Inquiry was established to investigate the matter. The issue was whether the provincial Board of Inquiry had jurisdiction to investigate into the conduct of the officers.
The issues on appeal to the Supreme Court were:
Justice Laforest, in dissent, argued that police conduct could fall within the province's property and civil rights
power under section 92(13) or likewise within the province's authority over the "administration of justice in the province" under section section 92(14).
Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeals in the Canadian justice system. The court grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts, and its decisions...
. The Saskatchewan provincial Human Rights Act was found not to apply to potentially discriminatory conduct that was acted as part of criminal law enforcement.
Background
Frederick Runns and a number of his friends were arrested by the Royal Canadian Mounted PoliceRoyal Canadian Mounted Police
The Royal Canadian Mounted Police , literally ‘Royal Gendarmerie of Canada’; colloquially known as The Mounties, and internally as ‘The Force’) is the national police force of Canada, and one of the most recognized of its kind in the world. It is unique in the world as a national, federal,...
in his hunting cabin for the assault of a conservation officer. The suspects were made to lay on the ground without being dressed in sub-zero temperature for approximately half an hour. They were eventually released.
Runns and his associates made a complaint to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission for arbitrary arrest. A Board of Inquiry was established to investigate the matter. The issue was whether the provincial Board of Inquiry had jurisdiction to investigate into the conduct of the officers.
The issues on appeal to the Supreme Court were:
- whether section 7 the Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, which allows the investigation of cases of arbitrary arrest or detention, is inoperative under section 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
- Whether the Board of Inquiry is able to adjudicate complaints of the RCMP officers.
Opinion of the Court
Justice Estey, writing for the majority, allowed the appeal. Estey found that section 7 of Code is inoperative as it concerns matters of criminal law, which is in the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government. As such, he did not need to consider the effects of section 96 of the Constitution Act, 1867.Justice Laforest, in dissent, argued that police conduct could fall within the province's property and civil rights
Property and civil rights
In Canadian constitutional law, section 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867 provides the provincial government with the exclusive authority to legislate on matters related to property and civil rights in the Province. Note that civil rights in this context is different from what is understood as civil...
power under section 92(13) or likewise within the province's authority over the "administration of justice in the province" under section section 92(14).