Administrative and Constitutional Law
Practice area
At Circle Barristers, we specialize in administrative and constitutional law, including under the Charter and federalism.
We frequently appear in the Federal Court, Ontario Superior Court, Divisional Court (Ontario), as well as the Ontario Court of Appeal, Federal Court of Appeal, British Columbia Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of Canada. We also appear at public inquiries and arbitrations on public law matters.
We are engaged in some of the most important cases across Canada. These include:
Public Inquiry into Foreign Interference in Federal Electoral Processes and Democratic Institutions (Hogue Commission): A public inquiry into foreign interference that China, Russia and other foreign actors may have engaged in, and any impact it may have had on the 2019 and 2021 Canadian federal elections.
Bjorkquist et al. v. AG Canada: A successful Charter challenge to the “second generation cut off” in the Citizenship Act, based on section 15 discrimination (sex and national origin), and section 6 mobility rights.
Cool World v. Twitter: Contract claim against Twitter (now X) for refusing to run an advertisement, raising the question of whether Twitter’s ad policies are void under the doctrine of public policy, which incorporates the Charter value of freedom of expression.
Canadian Constitution Foundation v. AG Canada: A successful challenge to the legality and constitutionality of public order emergency declared under the Emergencies Act.
Loshaj v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration: A constitutional challenge to section 39 of the Canada Evidence Act class privilege for cabinet confidences, shielding them from disclosure in court proceedings.
We also frequently appear for interveners in high-profile public law appeals. These include:
Caruso v. Law Society of Ontario: Representing the Canadian Immigration Lawyers’ Association, making submissions regarding the federal-provincial division of powers for the regulation of legal advice and representation in immigration and refugee law, specifically regarding paralegals.
Niagara Police Services Board v. Shanthakumar et al., Ontario Court of Appeal: Made submissions on behalf of the intervener, the South Asian Legal Clinic of Ontario, regarding the interpretation of negligence in light of the Charter value of equality.
Democracy Watch v. Ontario Integrity Commissioner: Represented a coalition of interveners, Animal Justice, British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, and Centre for Free Expression, advocating that public interest standing should be granted when the interests of private litigants are misaligned with the public interest.
Knauff v. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario: Made submissions before the Divisional Court on behalf of Animal Justice on issues of mootness and that ethical veganism is a creed deserving protection under the Human Rights Code in Ontario with guidance from the legislative history, jurisprudence under s. 2(a) of the Charter, and foreign decisions.
Khorsand v. Toronto Police Services Board: Made submissions on behalf of the South Asian Legal Clinic of Ontario regarding the interpretation of the Air Canada factors (used to determine if a decision is subject to public or private law) in light of the Charter value of equality.
Costa v. Seneca College: Represented a coalition of interveners—Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Canadian Constitution Foundation, and Democracy Watch—on whether NGOs who represent or financially support unsuccessful litigants in public interest litigation should bear adverse costs.
