Double aspect
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Double aspect is a legal doctrine in Canadian constitutional law that allows for laws to be created by both provincial and federal governments in relation to the same subject matter. Typically, the federalist system assigns subject matters of legislation to a single head of power. However, certain matters have several dimensions to them such that for one purpose the matter will fall to one head of power, while for another purpose it will fall to the other. For example, highway traffic laws fall into the property and civil rights power of the province but equally can be a criminal offence which is in the criminal law power of the federal government.
The origin of the doctrine comes from the Privy Council decision of Hodge v. The Queen (1883), where it was stated that "subjects which in one aspect and for one purpose fall within s. 92, may in another aspect and for another purpose fall within s. 91".
[edit] Matters of double aspect
The Courts have established several matters that are considered "double aspect" and can be legislated by either provincial or federal government. Those matters include:
- Entertainment in Taverns (Taverns Rio Hotel v. New Brunswick [1987])
- Gaming (R. v. Furtney [1991] 3 S.C.R. 89 and Siemens v. Manitoba)
- Interest rates (Ontario v. Barfried Enterprises [1963])
- Insolvency (Robinson v. Countrywide Factors [1978])
- Maintenance of spouses and child custody (Papp v. Papp (1970))
- Security regulations (Multiple Access v. McCutcheon [1982])
- Temperance (Attorney General of Ontario v. Attorney General of Canada [1896])
[edit] Reference
- Peter Hogg, Constitutional law of Canada, section 15.5(c)
