Federal appeals court rules Emergencies Act was unconstitutional
A federal appeals court has shut down the Trudeau government’s attempt to overturn a ruling that found the use of the Emergencies Act against peaceful Freedom Convoy protesters was unconstitutional.
Author: Clayton DeMaine
A federal appeals court has shut down the Trudeau government’s attempt to overturn a ruling that found the use of the Emergencies Act against peaceful Freedom Convoy protesters in 2022 was unconstitutional and violated the Charter rights of Canadians.
Donate to the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
The Federal Court of Appeals upheld on Friday a January 2024 Federal Court decision that the federal government’s invocation of the Emergencies Act was “unreasonable.” Justice Richard Mosley’s earlier ruling had declared the Act’s economic and emergency measures violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
“We are of the opinion that every appeal before this Court should be dismissed. The Federal Court correctly determined that the declaration of a public order emergency was unreasonable and that parts of the Regulations and Economic Order infringed paragraph 2(b) and section 8 of the Charter,” the decision reads. “the Federal Court made no reviewable error with regards to standing or in admitting evidence that was before the Public Order Emergency Commission.”
In its reasons, the appeal court ruled that Cabinet did not have “reasonable grounds to believe that a threat to national security existed,” a requirement for invoking the act. It also found that the government did not need to use the act to deal with the issues and, therefore, Trudeau’s use of the act did not meet the threshold of a national emergency.
The court found that “the only incident of violence put forward by the Attorney General of Canada” was the a firearms caches and ammunition found at Coutts Alberta and “vague reports of harassment, intimidation and assault, and that the Ottawa police were “overwhelmed.”
“In our view, this is insufficient to satisfy the compelling and credible information requirement to justify the conclusion that there were reasonable grounds to believe that there was a threat or use of acts of serious violence,” the court said in its decision. “Declaring a public order emergency is a very serious matter, considering the extraordinary powers vested in the executive branch of the federal government once the Actis invoked, and for that reason the exacting requirements set out by Parliament must be strictly adhered to.”
The Canadian Constitution Foundation, a civil liberties group that intervened against the federal government in the case, is celebrating a victory for the Charter rights of Canadians.
“This decision is excellent news for Canadians who care about their rights and freedoms,” Josh Dehaas, a litigator for the CCF told True North.“It means that governments that trample rights will face consequences. It means a future government will think twice before violating the Constitution.”
Dehaas said the case could still be seen by the Supreme Court of Canada if Prime Minister Mark Carney “decides he wants to ignore two courts and four judges that have now found the invocation was unlawful and violated Charter rights, we will see him at the Supreme Court.”
During the Freedom Convoy anti-vaccine mandate protests in February 2022, Carney wrote an opinion piece for the Globe and Mail recommending that the government freeze the protesters’ bank accounts. This action was made possible by the “unconstitutional” Emergencies Act.
Shared from https://www.junonews.com/p/breaking-federal-appeals-court-rules
Find the latest news and developments in regard to the FEDERAL COVID-19 Class Action Suits and relevant information
Grey Wowk Spencer LLP is the law firm handling these two Class Action Suits vs the Canadian Federal Government
CANADIAN C0VlD-l9 LAWSUIT NEWSLETTER – July 2, 2025
Current Status: During a case management conference held on June 26, 2025, an Order was granted setting out steps and deadlines for the parties leading up to a hearing on the Motion for Certification. 2025-06-26 Order
The procedural steps will take us into the spring of 2026. A Hearing will occur thereafter.
Vaccine Harms Lawsuit Newsletter – April 2025
We have been closing monitoring two motions before the superior courts in Alberta and Ontario regarding C-19 vaccine harms.
The Crown had brought forth motions to strike the pleadings in each of those lawsuits, in which decisions were recently rendered.
Ontario Court Decision: Hartman v. AG Canada
The Crown was successful in striking the entire action in Hartman v. Attorney General of Canada et al., 2025 ONSC 1831. However, the decision is being appealed in the Ontario Court of Appeal. This decision is quite concerning because the court found that Canada owes no duty of care to the public for harms caused by vaccines.
Alberta Update: Sakamoto v. Canada
In Sakamoto v Canada (Attorney General), 2025 ABKB 149v, the Court ordered that the any motion to strike will be heard at or concurrently with the certification application.
What This Means for Our Case
At this juncture, our action’s Application for Certification is on hold pending determination of the Crown’s duty of care in the above noted actions.
Contact Us Please forward all questions or concerns to ldoucet@gwsllp.ca
Find out more about joining these Class Action Lawsuits at: https://gwsllp.ca/covid-19-class-action-news/
.