Misplaced Pages

R v Gonzales

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

R. v. Gonzales (1962), 37 C.R. 56, was a landmark decision by the British Columbia Court of Appeal holding that Section 94(a) of the Indian Act did not violate the respondent's equality before the law, guaranteed under section 1(b) of the Canadian Bill of Rights, because all Indians were treated in the same way. Gonzales is particularly famous for employing the similarly situated test, which was not used in R. v. Drybones and was explicitly rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada in Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia.

See also

External links

Canadian Aboriginal and Indigenous law
Note: "Aboriginal law" refers to Canadian law dealing with Indigenous peoples; "Indigenous law" refers to the customary law of individual Indigenous groups.
Sources of law
Treaties and
governmental relations
Pre-Confederation
(pre-1867)
Upper Canada
treaties
Post-Confederation
(post-1867)
Case law
Indigenous customary law


Flag of CanadaJustice icon

This article about Canadian law is a stub. You can help Misplaced Pages by expanding it.

Categories: