What is the current state of the law on discrimination under s. 8(c) of the Criminal Code?

Further on this point, the conclusion in Wolff that, even if it could be demonstrated that inequality existed as a consequence of the provision contained in s. 8(c), it was not discriminatory, is equally applicable to the case here. All litigants against Her Majesty the Queen are similarly treated. As Mr. Justice Cory said later in Wolff, at pp. 700-01 S.C.R.: The manner in which a court must approach an alleged infringement of s. 15(1) was set forth by McIntyre J. in Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia (1989), 1989 CanLII 2 (SCC), 36 C.R.R. 193, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 143… He made it clear that one complaining of the violation of s. 15 must show “not only that he or she is not receiving equal treatment before and under the law or that the law has a differential impact on him or her in the protection or benefit accorded by law but, in addition, must show that the legislative impact of the law is discriminatory.” The appellants have not been able to satisfy either of these requirements. Again here, the plaintiff cannot satisfy either of those requirements.