From the Supreme Court of Canada, Should provincial law apply to banks OR does Canada’s Constitution give the federal government exclusive power to regulate banks?

7 thoughts on “From the Supreme Court of Canada, Should provincial law apply to banks OR does Canada’s Constitution give the federal government exclusive power to regulate banks?”

1. I think if challenged, FATCA would also contravene The Ontario Human Rights Code, The Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, Saskatchewan Bill of Rights, etc.. I hope the on-going federal court challenge would also be looked at by the Supreme Court, as breaking the various provincial and federal consumer protection jurisdictions, opening up new avenues for more challenges to FATCA.

   At least the latest ruling is diminishing the free hand of the Banks to behave like cowboys on the federal jurisdiction scene without any regard to the interest of their canadian clients.

2. Better yet; would be for the provinces file briefs that the IGA violates areas of provincial jurisdiction

3. Those who value freedon and privacy should try to gum up the works any way they can and prolong implementation as long as possible

4. I heard somewhere that an american family was suing a swiss bank not to hand over info to the IRS, and they won. I dont know what became of the case, however. I could imagine the bank must have thrown them out later.

5. More Provincial VS Federal, this time provincial privacy law, Alberta: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/politics/Privacy+boss+warns+Prentice+over+delay+fall+legislature/10229351/story.html

   When the Supreme Court of Canada issued its unanimous decision last November 15 declaring Alberta’s legislation infringed freedom of expression guarantees, it gave the province a year to bring the law in line with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

   If an amended law is not passed by that date or the top court refuses to grant an extension, Clayton said Alberta’s citizens and businesses stand to lose the unique benefits afforded by the act, including mandatory breach reporting, notification to affected individuals if their personal information is stolen or compromised and local enforcement without court involvement when a company or organization breaks the law.

6. http://nupge.ca/content/11870/bill-c-377-unnecessary-undermining-and-undemocratic
   Will the Conservatives push another bill through?

   Bill C-377 back in the Senate for debate

   In June 2013, Liberal Senators joined forces with 16 Conservatives to amend Bill C-377, citing concerns that it is unconstitutional, violates privacy and is undemocratic. The bill was sent back to the House of Commons, but the Prime Minister prorogued Parliament before it could be considered. Following prorogation, as per legislative rules, the proposed bill returned to the Senate in its original form to start the process all over again.

   As the Senate begins debate on the bill once again, Conservative Senators are moving to limit debate on private member’s bills, no doubt in a concerted effort to quickly pass the bill, without amendments.
   …
   2. It treats unions like they’re under federal jurisdiction. They’re not. They fall under provincial jurisdiction:

7. Supreme court, here we come! (Again)