Bliss v. Canada (Attorney General)
Encyclopedia
Bliss v. Canada [1979] 1 S.C.R. 183 is a famous Supreme Court of Canada
decision on equality rights for women under the Canadian Bill of Rights
. The Court held that women were not entitled to benefits denied to them by the Unemployment Insurance Act during a certain period of pregnancy. This case has since become the prime example demonstrating the inadequacies of the Canadian Bill of Rights in protecting individuals' rights. This ruling was eventually overturned in Brooks v. Canada Safeway Ltd., [1989] 1 SCR 1219.
Bliss challenged the limitation of benefits under section 46 as a violation of section 1(b) of the Bill of Rights which protects against discrimination based on sex and ensures "the right of the individual to equality before the law and the protection of the law". Bliss claimed that the law violated her right to "equality before the law".
The Board of Referees, the employment tribunal of the day, rejected her claim, however on appeal to the "Umpire" she succeeded. At the Federal Court of Appeal the Umpire's decision was overturned.
Richie noted that the Act was a complete code that took into account the interests of women, and "any inequality between the sexes in this area is not created by legislation but by nature." This means that while the Bill of Rights guards against sex discrimination, in this case the discrimination was not against women but pregnant people. He rejected the argument that section 46 denied "equality before the law" and found that the Act was a perfectly valid exercise of Parliament's authority to create legislation.
of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
, which was added to the Constitution of Canada
in 1982. Like the equality rights in the Bill of Rights, the original version of section 15 spoke of equality before the law and equal protection of the law. When it was later enacted, section 15 also guaranteed equality under the law and equal benefit of the law. The reason for the addition of equal benefit of the law was Ritchie's finding in Bliss that legal benefits need not be equal.
In Brooks v. Safeway Canada (1989), the Supreme Court overturned Bliss. The Court found discrimination against pregnant people to be discrimination against women under the provincial Human Rights Code of Manitoba
. Like Bliss, Brooks was not a Charter case, though the Court did consider a definition of discrimination under the Charter case Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia
.
Stella Bliss died of brain cancer at age 56 in Victoria, British Columbia, in 1997.
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...
decision on equality rights for women under the Canadian Bill of Rights
Canadian Bill of Rights
The Canadian Bill of Rights is a federal statute and bill of rights enacted by Prime Minister John Diefenbaker's government on August 10, 1960. It provides Canadians with certain quasi-constitutional rights in relation to other federal statutes...
. The Court held that women were not entitled to benefits denied to them by the Unemployment Insurance Act during a certain period of pregnancy. This case has since become the prime example demonstrating the inadequacies of the Canadian Bill of Rights in protecting individuals' rights. This ruling was eventually overturned in Brooks v. Canada Safeway Ltd., [1989] 1 SCR 1219.
Background
Stella Bliss had to leave her work due to pregnancy four days before giving birth. Due to her situation she was not entitled to full benefits under section 30 of the Act, but rather she was subject to section 46 which denied her benefits for a period of six weeks after childbirth.Bliss challenged the limitation of benefits under section 46 as a violation of section 1(b) of the Bill of Rights which protects against discrimination based on sex and ensures "the right of the individual to equality before the law and the protection of the law". Bliss claimed that the law violated her right to "equality before the law".
The Board of Referees, the employment tribunal of the day, rejected her claim, however on appeal to the "Umpire" she succeeded. At the Federal Court of Appeal the Umpire's decision was overturned.
Opinion of the Court
Justice Ritchie, writing for a unanimous court, held that the Act was valid and did not violate the Bill of Rights equality provision.Richie noted that the Act was a complete code that took into account the interests of women, and "any inequality between the sexes in this area is not created by legislation but by nature." This means that while the Bill of Rights guards against sex discrimination, in this case the discrimination was not against women but pregnant people. He rejected the argument that section 46 denied "equality before the law" and found that the Act was a perfectly valid exercise of Parliament's authority to create legislation.
Aftermath
The decision in this case later influenced the equality rights in section 15Section Fifteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Section Fifteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms contains guaranteed equality rights. As part of the Constitution, the section prohibits certain forms of discrimination perpetrated by the governments of Canada with the exception of ameliorative programs and rights or privileges...
of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada. It forms the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982...
, which was added to the Constitution of Canada
Constitution of Canada
The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law in Canada; the country's constitution is an amalgamation of codified acts and uncodified traditions and conventions. It outlines Canada's system of government, as well as the civil rights of all Canadian citizens and those in Canada...
in 1982. Like the equality rights in the Bill of Rights, the original version of section 15 spoke of equality before the law and equal protection of the law. When it was later enacted, section 15 also guaranteed equality under the law and equal benefit of the law. The reason for the addition of equal benefit of the law was Ritchie's finding in Bliss that legal benefits need not be equal.
In Brooks v. Safeway Canada (1989), the Supreme Court overturned Bliss. The Court found discrimination against pregnant people to be discrimination against women under the provincial Human Rights Code of Manitoba
Manitoba
Manitoba is a Canadian prairie province with an area of . The province has over 110,000 lakes and has a largely continental climate because of its flat topography. Agriculture, mostly concentrated in the fertile southern and western parts of the province, is vital to the province's economy; other...
. Like Bliss, Brooks was not a Charter case, though the Court did consider a definition of discrimination under the Charter case Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia
Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia
Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia, [1989] 1 SCR 143 is the first Supreme Court of Canada case to deal with section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms...
.
Stella Bliss died of brain cancer at age 56 in Victoria, British Columbia, in 1997.