It is also noteworthy that the effect of the trial judge considering content at the second stage of the City of Montreal analysis, and relying on the fact that Transit and TransLink had historically permitted commercial expression on the outside of their buses to the exclusion of political or advocacy expression, was to prefer the protection of commercial expression over political expression. This result is inconsistent with the pre-eminence which political expression has been given in such decisions as Libman v. Quebec (Attorney General), 1997 CanLII 326 (SCC), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 569, where the court stated (at para. 29): Political expression is at the very heart of the values sought to be protected by the freedom of expression guaranteed by s. 2(b) of the Canadian Charter.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.