McIvor: Justice Delayed-Again

From the Author's Introduction: "In addition to the McIvor case, there are two other landmark cases on discrimination against women in the registration provisions, those brought by Jeannette Corbibre Lavell and Sandra Lovelace, but they differ from McIvor in that both cases challenged only the marrying out rule. Furthermore, the Lavell [1] and Lovelace [2] cases deal with the pre-1985 Indian Act [3], whereas McIvor impugns the validity of putative remedial legislation (still known colloquially as Bill C-31), which came into effect on the same day as s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, April 17, 1985, and added a problematic new s. 6 to the Indian Act.[4] --------------------------------------------------------------- The McIvor case is the broadest court challenge to discrimination against women in the registration provisions, which has yet been heard. It is also the first case to be decided under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.[5] The McIvor litigation is the first major case to illuminate clearly how the complex discrimination in the Indian Act registration provisions has disadvantaged Indian [6] women. -------------------------------- After an overview of the two main strands of discrimination against women which have operated together for over a century and a half, the Comment addresses the decisions of the British Columbia Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, and the government's response to the Court of Appeal decision." Pg 17.

Eberts, Mary
Primary Resource
Publication Date
Publication Information

Eberts, Mary. "McIvor: Justice Delayed-Again." Indigenous Law Journal 9 (2010).