BROADCASTS.com

b'

This week on Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan:

Anti-vaccination protesters have been holding up copies of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and arguing that it prohibits restrictions on unvaccinated people entering restaurants, bars, gyms, and other locations.\\xa0

British Columbia, and several other provinces, are implementing systems to provide digital proof of vaccination against COVID-19 in parallel with restrictions on unvaccinated people attending to a range of non-essential service locations where transmission could occur.\\xa0

One of the Charter sections frequently reference by anti-vaccination advocates is section 7, which provides that \\u201cEveryone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordant with principles of fundamental justice.\\u201d\\xa0

The legal meaning of this important protection is not so expansive as to prevent anyone from being encouraged or even compelled, to do anything they don\\u2019t like.\\xa0

The rights and freedoms protected by the Charter have legal meanings that are explained in court decisions considering them. It is necessary to review these decisions to determine how the language in the Charter is likely to be interpreted in future cases.\\xa0

In addition, Section 1 of the Charter says the following \\u201cThe Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.\\u201d\\xa0

It is therefore exceedingly unlikely that the Charter would be interpreted in such a way that would afford unvaccinated people the right to engage in non-essential activity that puts other people at greater risk of infection with COVID-19.

The Charter also doesn\\u2019t prohibit laws intended to protect individuals themselves. Examples of these include seatbelt law, helmet laws for bicycles and motorcycles, and laws that prohibit the personal possession of dangerous drugs.\\xa0

Also on the show, the BC Court of Appeal has expanded the circumstances in which a marriage annulment can be obtained.\\xa0

To obtain an annulment based on a failure to consummate a marriage, it\\u2019s necessary to establish that the failure to consummate the marriage was the result of a physical inability or psychological incapacity to do so.\\xa0

The case the Court of Appeal dealt with involved a Sikh couple who were married in a civil ceremony prior to live together because doing otherwise would be contrary to their religion. They put off consummating the marriage until they could also have a traditional Gurdwara ceremony, on religious grounds. Before that occurred, the couple separated.

The Court of Appeal concluded that sincerely held religious belief can constitute a \\u201cpsychological incapacity\\u201d to facilitate an annulment.\\xa0

Finally, on the show, in response to ongoing COVID-19 challenges, the Provincial Court has now facilitated either the person disputing a Motor Vehicle Act ticket, or the police officer who issued it, applying to appear in court by use of MS Teams, or telephone.\\xa0

This change, like some others prompted by COVID-19, will add to general efficiency and will facilitate access to the court at a lower cost. People will be able to dispute tickets without needing to travel to the location they were issued or taking more time away from work. Police, who may be subject to transfer will be able to attend court at a lower cost.\\xa0

Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the cases discussed.\\xa0

\\xa0

\\xa0