LEAF: Women's Legal Education and Action Fund

LEAF successfully intervened in this family law case dealing with the recourse and remedies available when parties, primarily men, are in breach of family court orders. On February 9, 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada agreed with LEAF that men must be held accountable to their family law obligations and can be found in contempt of court if they are not.

Compensation for survivors of residential school sexual abuse (2005)

LEAF, the Native Women's Association of Canada (NWAC), and the DisAbled Women's Network Canada (DAWN) intervened in coalition in Barney v. Canada - a case that sought compensation for Aboriginal residential school survivors subjected to multiple forms of abuse. The Supreme Court of Canada agreed with the Coalition that residential school survivors should be compensated for sexual assault.

“Rape shield” law upheld (Mills, 2000)

The Supreme Court of Canada unanimously upheld provisions in the Criminal Code limiting the use of a woman's sexual past history as evidence, thus ending a long battle over the so-called "rape shield" laws (which shield the person assaulted from being traumatized further on the witness stand). LEAF was involved in both law reform and litigation on this point of law. This decision reaffirmed the importance to maintain sensitivity to the equality rights of women when considering an accused's right to a fair trial. This section of the Criminal Code properly balances the interests of accused persons, complainants, and society as a whole.

Protecting women’s personal records in court (Darrach, 1999)

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Bill C-49 does not infringe the Charter rights of accused persons. This law protects the private records of women in sexual assault trials. LEAF intervened in this case because applications for complainants' records in sexual assault trials are usually based on myths and stereotypes about women and therefore make it more difficult to have fair trials. The court found that the legislation was constitutional because it balanced the rights of complainants and the accused.

Access to legal aid (J.G. v. New Brunswick, 1999)

The Supreme Court of Canada held that a poor, single mother had been unfairly denied legal assistance in a case where the mother sought custody of her children. Notwithstanding the narrow legal aid scheme in New Brunswick, the Court held that access to a lawyer was necessary in order for the complex proceedings to meet the requirement of "fundamental justice" set out in section 7 of the Charter. Because Section 7 has generally been applied to criminal cases, the majority of women's encounters with the law are not in the criminal law context, the Court's analysis was extremely important for women.

Workplace discrimination (BCGSEU, 1999)

In this unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that if a workplace rule (in this case, a test of running speed) systemically excludes women or other groups it must be scrutinized to ensure whether it is truly required in order to determine job performance. The government of BC was required to reinstate forest firefighter Tawney Meiorin to her job. Court decisions and legal opinions often refer to the "Meiorin Standards."

No means no (Ewanchuk, 1999)

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of Canada declared that a person's "no" means "no." The Court, having heard LEAF's equality argument, held that no one has the right to sexually touch another unless that person communicates consent clearly. Your consent must be positively established: silence, inaction, or ambiguous conduct is not ever consent. This is an absolute statement that there is no such thing as "implied consent" to sexual assault. The Court stated that this approach is necessary to safeguard everyone's personal autonomy and bodily integrity.

Medical interpreters for people with hearing disabilities (Eldridge, 1997)

LEAF intervened in the case at the Supreme Court of Canada to argue that sign language interpretation should be funded as a medical service under B.C.'s health care legislation. LEAF demonstrated that sign language interpretation is crucial for ensuring proper communication between people who are deaf and their doctors. The Supreme Court agreed with LEAF and DAWN Canada and ruled that sign language should be funded as a medical service.

A woman’s right to choose (Daigle v Tremblay, 1992)

Chantal Daigle's ex-boyfriend got an injunction to prevent her from obtaining an abortion. The Quebec Court of Appeal, in a stunning decision, upheld the injunction. The Quebec woman appealed this to the Supreme Court of Canada, where LEAF made arguments to the Court that reproductive rights are fundamental to women's equality. The Court was unanimous in overturning the injunction and ruling that the fetus is not a legal "person." This was a critical decision for women's right to control their own bodies.

Obscene materials (Butler, 1992)

In the case of Butler, LEAF intervened at the Supreme Court of Canada to argue that violent pornography harms women and girls. The Court upheld the Criminal Code's obscenity provisions as constitutional saying that the provisions address the grave harms posed by this material.

Parental leave (Schachter, 1992)

Additional childcare benefits must be extended to all biological parents - available to either mothers or fathers. This was an important ruling for women as it recognized that both parents have a role to play in the care of a new baby.

Fair pensions (Albrecht, 1990)

After a 35-year marriage ended in divorce, Albrecht lost her rights to a division of Canada Pension Plan credits. LEAF intervened at the Ontario Divisional Court and helped win a ruling that a woman is entitled to share a couple's Canada Pension Plan credits if there is a separation or divorce. This case was an important step in addressing the circumstances of older women and to reduce their vulnerability to poverty.

No to sexual harassment (Janzen and Govereau, 1989)

When two servers were sexually harassed at the Winnipeg restaurant where they worked, they took their case all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada. With LEAF's help, they won an important ruling that recognized sexual harassment as sex discrimination and, therefore, illegal. This decision has helped many women fight sexual harassment in the workplace.

Pregnancy without penalty (Brooks, 1989)

For years, women were fired, passed over for promotions and denied training because they were pregnant or might become pregnant. LEAF intervened in the case of three Winnipeg women who worked at Canada Safeway, Ltd. and who were denied benefits while they were pregnant. LEAF helped win a groundbreaking decision that pregnancy discrimination is sex discrimination and illegal. This ruling has changed the lives of thousands of women in Canada.

Publication ban (Canada Newspapers, 1989)

LEAF helped win this ruling that women and children who have been raped have the right to prevent the media from revealing their names.

Expanding the definition of equality (Andrews, 1989)

In a major breakthrough for women, LEAF persuades the Supreme Court of Canada-in its first ruling on the meaning of the equality guarantees-to adopt the substantive approach to equality. In the Andrews case, the Court throws out a long-standing view of equality-that women have the right to be treated equally to men only to the extent that they are the same as men. The Court replaces it with the idea that sometimes, different people have to be treated differently to ensure real equality.

LEAF has intervened in over 150 cases that have advanced equality in Canada. Here is a snapshot of some of these cases. [search LEAF case information]

Spousal support (2007)