Causing a Comeau-tion, Part Two

09/25/18 • 16 min

Part one of Causing a Comeau-tion explored an attempt to break down interprovincial trade barriers in Canada through the use of litigation. In part two, we consider the consequences of the case. The Supreme Court ruled that the existing barriers to the sale of alcohol across provincial borders do not violate the constitution. While the case might initially appear to be a straightforward defeat for the litigants, the case could lead to other types of victories that prove it to be an example of successful legal mobilization. We get back in touch with Howard Anglin and Professor Christopher Manfredi, who share their thoughts on the decision and what its ultimate outcomes could be.

This podcast is by Adam Casey, Podcast Editor for volume 64 of the McGill Law Journal.

This podcast is by Adam Casey, Podcast Editor for volume 64 of the McGill Law Journal.

Previous Episode

Causing a Comeau-tion, Part One

“Free the Beer!” It’s become a rallying cry across Canada, largely thanks to a legal challenge brought before the Supreme Court in 2017 concerning the transfer of alcohol across provincial borders. In R v Comeau, the Court considered the constitutionality of interprovincial trade barriers on the sale of alcohol following an appeal brought by Gerard Comeau, a man who was fined for transporting alcohol from Quebec to New Brunswick.

In this episode, we examine the struggle to break down interprovincial trade barriers, as well as the institutional and political pressures that make litigation the best (and perhaps the only) way to do it. McGill political science professor Christopher Manfredi tells us about legal mobilization, the process of using litigation to push for a policy goal. We also speak with Howard Anglin, Executive Director of the Canadian Constitution Foundation, who explains why the CCF decided to support Mr. Comeau’s case and what they hoped to achieve.

This podcast was created and produced by Adam Casey and Emma Noradounkian, editors for volume 63 of the McGill Law Journal.

Next Episode

Smart Cities: Who Owns the Data?

The city of Toronto is currently working with a private company to develop a “smart city”—a neighbourhood that incorporates the collection of big data into its urban design. Since its inception, the project has inspired debate about how data generated by the public/private partnerships ought to be used. In this podcast, we consider the implications of some of these questions, and ask who should own the data and intellectual property generated from projects that rely on both public and private investment. We will hear from Teresa Scassa, Canada Research Chair in information, law and policy at the University of Ottawa, and Natalie Raffoul, an IP lawyer called to the bar in Ontario with a practice that focuses on procurement, licensing, and other IP issues. This podcast is produced by Andrea Salguero and Adam Casey, editors for volume 64 of the McGill Law Journal.