Halpern v Canada (AG)
Halpern v Canada (AG), [2003] O.J. No. 2268 is a June 10, 2003 decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in which the Court found that the common law definition of marriage, which defined marriage as between one man and one woman, violated section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
| Halpern v Canada (AG) | |
|---|---|
| Court | Court of Appeal for Ontario |
| Full case name | Hedy Halpern and Colleen Rogers, Michael Leshner and Michael Stark, Aloysius Pittman and Thomas Allworth, Dawn Onishenko and Julie Erbland, Carolyn Rowe and Carolyn Moffatt, Barbara McDowall and Gail Donnelly, Alison Kemper and Joyce Barnett v Attorney General of Canada, The Attorney General of Ontario, and Novina Wong, The Clerk of the City of Toronto |
| Decided | June 10, 2003 |
| Case history | |
| Appealed from | Ontario Superior Court |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Roy McMurtry C.J.O, James MacPherson, Eileen Gillese JJ.A. |
| Same-sex marriage in Canada |
|---|
BC
AB
SK
MB
ON
QC
NB
PE
NS
NL
YT
NT
NU
|
| Legal |
|
Reference Re Same-Sex Marriage Halpern v Canada (AG) Civil Marriage Act |
| Parliament |
| 38th House · 39th House |
| Same-sex marriage by province |
| Related |
|
Civil unions in Quebec Adult interdependent relationship in Alberta Domestic partnership in Nova Scotia Common-law relationships in Manitoba |
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.