Egan v. Canada
Egan v. Canada is a significant legal case concerning the interpretation of the Old Age Security Act and its implications for same-sex couples. The case arose when James Egan and his partner John Norris Nesbit, who had been in a long-term relationship since 1948, faced denial of spousal benefits under the Act due to their same-sex relationship. The Act defined a spouse as a person of the opposite sex, which led to the rejection of Nesbit's application for a spousal allowance when he turned sixty. After unsuccessful attempts in lower courts, the couple appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, arguing that the Act discriminated against them based on sexual orientation, violating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Supreme Court utilized a three-part test to evaluate the discrimination claim, ultimately concluding that while the Act did create a disadvantage for same-sex couples, the distinction was deemed relevant based on traditional definitions of marriage. Despite their loss in court, the case is noted for its landmark implications, as it contributed to the broader recognition of equal rights for LGBTQ+ individuals in Canada, affirming that sexual orientation is a protected ground against discrimination. This ruling has been referenced in discussions advocating for gay and lesbian rights in various jurisdictions, highlighting the ongoing evolution of human rights legislation.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Egan v. Canada
Identification Canadian Supreme Court decision
Date Decided on May 25, 1995
When Canada granted equal protection to same-sex couples, it signified a move in North America toward allowing sexual minorities to share in many of the rights that the heterosexual community already enjoys. Pressure increased for the United States to extend equal protection to gays and lesbians.
Egan v. Canada involved sections of the Old Age Security Act, which provides an allowance to the spouse of a retiree, provided that the income of the couple falls below a fixed level. James Egan and John Norris Nesbit were a gay couple who had lived together since 1948. When Egan reached age sixty-five in 1986, he began to receive old age security and guaranteed income supplements under the act. On reaching age sixty, Nesbit applied for a spousal allowance. The application was rejected because the relationship between the men did not fall under the provisions of the act, which stated that a spouse is “a person of the opposite sex who is living with that person, having lived with that person for at least one year, if the two persons have publicly represented themselves as husband and wife.” After losing their case in the Trial Division and the Federal Court of Appeal, Egan and Nesbit brought an appeal to the Supreme Court. They argued that the act violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation.
The Supreme Court applied a three-part test to determine whether or not the act amounted to discrimination. It looked at whether the law drew a distinction between the claimant and others, whether the distinction resulted in a disadvantage to the group of people to which the plaintiff belongs, and whether the distinction was based on an irrelevant personal characteristic. The justices found that the act made a distinction between the claimant that resulted in a disadvantage but that the distinction was relevant because it was grounded on the unique social relationship of marriage. The court based this finding on the fact that only heterosexual couples are capable of procreation. The court then dismissed the appeal.
Impact
Although Egan and Nesbit lost, the court made a landmark decision in support of equal rights for gays and lesbians. It ruled that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was prohibited by section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canada’s expansion of human rights to ban discrimination on account of sexual orientation often is cited by proponents of gay and lesbian rights in the United States.
Bibliography
Lahey, Kathleen A. Are We “Persons” Yet? Law and Sexuality in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999.
MacDougall, Bruce. Queer Judgments: Homosexuality, Expression, and the Courts in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000.