In particular, the case sets out the criteria a public-interest group must meet in order to be allowed to mount a constitutional challenge in court.

The Attorney General of Canada moved to strike out the claim on the basis that the Council did not have standing to bring the action.

The Court acknowledged the need for public-interest standing in principle, to ensure that government is not immunized from constitutional challenges to legislation.

The current test for standing, as summarized in this decision, considers three factors: On the facts of the case the Court found that the claim did raise some serious questions.

Evidence showed that many are capable of making claims, which, in all, were better ways to challenge a law as there are concrete facts behind it.