does section 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867 guarantee free trade across provincial borders for films?
Law State Constitution – LAWS 2501 A & B – Course Paper Topics
Each of these three (3) essay topics is intended to enhance your understanding of an aspect of this course. You are to select one topic below and write an essay on the topic- note: read the questions closely and answer the questions posed. You are expected to research and make sense of the topics independently; I won’t be able to answer “am I on the right track?” types of questions, or to comment on any drafts before your final copy is due on, or before, midnight , November 10, 2021. Despite the foregoing, I am available for consultation on your paper, please contact me if you need assistance.
Make sure you address the various aspects of the topic necessary to answering the question. You must independently assess how much space to devote to each aspect, depending on the importance it appears to have in the context of the question as a whole. The body of the paper’s text is strictly limited to between 10 and 12 double spaced pages. It is to be written in 12 point font, and include a title page, page numbers, footnotes, bibliography and citations following the Canadian Guide to Uniform Legal Citation (McGill Guide) format. Please note that overdue essays without proof of a valid excuse (e.g. death in the family, illness, injury) will be penalized 4% for each calendar day beyond the deadline. Any paper more than seven (7) days late will automatically receive a failing grade.
Essay Topic #1
Section 123 (a) of the Quebec’s Film Control Act forbids its residents from possessing large caches of movies not purchased from the newly established Quebec Film Corporation. This Act would make it illegal for residents of Quebec to purchase films in other provinces.. The RCMP was watching Quebec residents who crossed the border into New Brunswick to buy cheaper, non-Quebec made films. On October 23, 2021, Mr. Marc Bernier drove to New Brunswick from his home in Degelis, Quebec to stock up on “foreign” movies he bought in Edmundston, New Brunswick. When he returned to Quebec, Mr. Bernier was stopped by the RCMP with a large supply of “foreign” movies. He was fined $1759.00 for violating section 123(a) of the Quebec Film Control Act – for the possession of a large cache of films not purchased from the Quebec Film Corporation. Mr. Bernier admitted to the RCMP that he had intended to later re-sell these DVD films on the “black film market” in Quebec for a substantial profit.
Mr. Bernier fought the fine. He said that section 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867 guarantees free trade across provincial borders. The Crown disagreed. It argued that section 121 was only meant to prevent provinces from charging tariffs or similar costs at the border. The Crown said the provision did not apply in Mr. Bernier’s situation. The trial judge agreed with Mr. Bernier and dismissed the charge. The Court of Appeal of Quebec dismissed the Crown’s request for permission to appeal. The Crown has appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.
On learning of the appeal, Quebec’s government issued a statement reiterating the main purpose of its law which was “to increase the presence of Quebec films that its residents watched by restricting the purchase of movies to approved films sold by the Quebec Film Corporation.” Quebec government spokesperson Ms. Terry Vachon in explaining the law noted that the Quebec Film Corporation’s mandate was “to get Quebecers to buy movies with Quebec characters in them that spoke the French language.” She also said that ”the law does not require the actors portraying the characters to actually be Quebecois but just that some of the characters within the film itself would have to be Quebec characters who spoke French in the movie.” Vachon added that “For example, for the Quebec Film Corporation to carry and sell the movie Pirates of the Caribbean the main character—played by Johnny Depp, Captain Jack Sparrow— might have to have had a sidekick from say Rimouski that spoke some French dialogue in the film. In other words, before the Quebec Film Corporation could sell Pirates of the Caribbean or any other film to residents of the province, a Quebec character that spoke some French would have to be present in the film.” Ms. Vachon also denied Mr. Bernier’s claim, made in the Montreal press, that “the Quebec Film Corporation is a simple tax grab dressed up as a Quebec cultural law.” Ms. Vachon countered that “the Quebec’s Film Control Act, and the Quebec Film Corporation that this Act establishes, have nothing to do with revenue.”
You are a lawyer retained by Mr. Kevin Tierney who is a producer of the film Bon Cop, Bad Cop a 2006 Canadian movie. Mr. Bernier had fifty (50) legally purchased copies of this movie in his possession that he bought in New Brunswick and imported into Quebec to re-sell. The Quebec Film Corporation does not carry or sell Bon Cop, Bad Cop. Mr. Tierney asks you to intervene in the upcoming Supreme Court case on his behalf to support Mr. Bernier’s legal argument. However, before you do that, Mr. Tierney also asks you to write an opinion fully explaining whether Mr. Bernier’s legal argument will be successful before the Supreme Court of Canada.
Please write an essay based upon the foregoing fact scenario that determines whether the Quebec government has the power under section 92(13) to restrict its residents from possessing large caches of movies not purchased from the Quebec Film Corporation—for example, films purchased from other provinces. In other words, does section 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867 guarantee free trade across provincial borders for films? Does section 121 of the Constitution Act 1867 prohibit the restrictions found in section 123 (a) of the Quebec’s Film Control Act? Please remember to confine your main argument to the interplay of sections 92(13) and 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Please also remember to fully justify your essay within the terms of the relevant Constitutional case law.
