|
''Dunmore v Ontario (AG)'', () 3 S.C.R. 1016, 2001 SCC 94, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the constitutional right to freedom of association under section 2(d) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms''. The Court held that the lack of a positive framework that protected farm workers from employer reprisals for exercising their associational rights under the Charter constituted a 'substantial interference' of their right to freedom of association. The Ontario Government responded with the Agricultural Employees Protection Act, which extended only to agricultural workers, and prohibited employer reprisals against employees exercising their rights under section 2(d) of the Charter. ==Background== In 1994, the Ontario government under the New Democratic Party of Ontario passed the ''Agricultural Labour Relations Act'' which gave trade union and collective bargaining rights to Ontario's agricultural workers. The following year Mike Harris' Progressive Conservatives came into power and subsequently passed the ''Labour Relations and Employment Statute Law Amendment Act'' (LRESLAA) which repealed the 1994 Act and terminated any agreements made under that Act. Tom Dunmore, Salame Abdulhamid, Walter Lumsden and Michael Doyle with support from the United Food and Commercial Workers brought an application on behalf of the agricultural workers of Ontario to challenge the LRESLAA as a violation of their right to freedom of association and equality rights under sections 2(d) and 15(1) of the ''Charter'' respectively. At trial the judge found that the LRESLAA did not prevent the agricultural workers from forming a labour union and that any obstacles were the result of the actions of their employers which are private parties and beyond the scope of the ''Charter''. The decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal. The issues before the Supreme Court was whether the LRESLAA violated section 2(d) or 15(1) of the ''Charter'', and if so, whether it could be saved under section 1. The majority of the Court held that section 2(d) was violated and could not be justified under section 1. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Dunmore v Ontario (AG)」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|