R v Gonzales
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.
Wikipage redirect
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
primaryTopic
R v Gonzales
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.
has abstract
R. v. Gonzales (1962), 37 C.R. ...... w Society of British Columbia.
@en
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
Wikipage page ID
10,129,509
page length (characters) of wiki page
Wikipage revision ID
1,005,458,162
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
wikiPageUsesTemplate
comment
R. v. Gonzales (1962), 37 C.R. ...... w Society of British Columbia.
@en
label
R v Gonzales
@en