Difference between revisions of "Course:Law3020/2014WT1/Group G/Case Overview"
Freemank13 (talk | contribs) |
Freemank13 (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Facts: In Quebec at this time the Quebec government was prohibiting Quebec residents from taking out insurance to obtain private sector health care services that were presently already available under Quebec's current public health care plan. Z was experiencing a number of health problems that lead him to speak out against the waiting times he was experiencing in the public health care system in Quebec. A physician, C, has also been continuously trying to have his home-delivered medical activities recognized as well as to obtain a license to operate an independent hospital in his city; he has been unsuccessful thus far. | + | == Case Overview == |
| + | === Facts: === | ||
| + | In Quebec at this time the Quebec government was prohibiting Quebec residents from taking out insurance to obtain private sector health care services that were presently already available under Quebec's current public health care plan. Z was experiencing a number of health problems that lead him to speak out against the waiting times he was experiencing in the public health care system in Quebec. A physician, C, has also been continuously trying to have his home-delivered medical activities recognized as well as to obtain a license to operate an independent hospital in his city; he has been unsuccessful thus far. | ||
| + | |||
Both Z and C have taken issue with the validity of the prohibition on private health insurance provided for in s.15 of the Health Insurance Act (HEIA) and s.11 of the Hospital Insurance Act (HOIA). They claim that these prohibitions deprive them access to health care services that do not come with extraneous waiting times that they currently receive with the public system. | Both Z and C have taken issue with the validity of the prohibition on private health insurance provided for in s.15 of the Health Insurance Act (HEIA) and s.11 of the Hospital Insurance Act (HOIA). They claim that these prohibitions deprive them access to health care services that do not come with extraneous waiting times that they currently receive with the public system. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Provisions in question: | ||
| Line 12: | Line 17: | ||
Ratio: | Ratio: | ||
Analysis: | Analysis: | ||
| + | |||
| + | Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms | ||
| + | Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms | ||
| + | Section 9.1 of the Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms | ||
Conclusion/Holding: According to the Supreme Court of Canada the appeal should be allowed. The Court decided that s.15 of the HEIA and s.11 of the HOIA are inconsistent with the Quebec Charter. | Conclusion/Holding: According to the Supreme Court of Canada the appeal should be allowed. The Court decided that s.15 of the HEIA and s.11 of the HOIA are inconsistent with the Quebec Charter. | ||
Revision as of 07:44, 18 March 2014
Case Overview
Facts:
In Quebec at this time the Quebec government was prohibiting Quebec residents from taking out insurance to obtain private sector health care services that were presently already available under Quebec's current public health care plan. Z was experiencing a number of health problems that lead him to speak out against the waiting times he was experiencing in the public health care system in Quebec. A physician, C, has also been continuously trying to have his home-delivered medical activities recognized as well as to obtain a license to operate an independent hospital in his city; he has been unsuccessful thus far.
Both Z and C have taken issue with the validity of the prohibition on private health insurance provided for in s.15 of the Health Insurance Act (HEIA) and s.11 of the Hospital Insurance Act (HOIA). They claim that these prohibitions deprive them access to health care services that do not come with extraneous waiting times that they currently receive with the public system.
Provisions in question:
Issue(s): The main question at hand in this case is whether Quebec has the constitutional authority to establish a single-tier health plan while discouraging a second private tier health sector through specific prohibitions and whether these prohibitions infringe a persons s. 7 right of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
If so, is this deprivation of a persons s. 7 right of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice and can it be justified under s.1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or under s. 9.1 of Quebec Charter?
From the case*** cite
Ratio: Analysis:
Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Section 9.1 of the Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms Conclusion/Holding: According to the Supreme Court of Canada the appeal should be allowed. The Court decided that s.15 of the HEIA and s.11 of the HOIA are inconsistent with the Quebec Charter.