Yes No Share to Facebook
Understanding Statutory Interpretation: Context, Grammar, and Keeping Harmony with Legislative Intent
Question: How do Canadian courts interpret statutes?
Answer: Canadian courts interpret statutes using the modern approach that requires reading the statute in its entire context and according to its grammatical and ordinary meaning, while harmonizing with the act's scheme, purpose, and legislative intent. This method is reinforced by rulings such as Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Re), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27 and Huether v. Sharpe, 2025 ONCA 140. For reliable legal guidance, consider reaching out to a professional service like Marketing.Legal to ensure the law aligns with your situation.
Applicable Rules When Interpreting Statutes
Statutory interpretation is crucial to a review of the law and to resolution of legal disputes, regardless of the type of law applicable to the issues involved. Whereas differing viewpoints can exist, and thereby lead to differing interpretations, courts have established rules as guides to assist in the interpretation and application of legistlative statutes. Statutory interpretation is a cornerstone for ensuring that the legal system functions effectively, by harmonizing laws with the intended purpose of the laws.
The Law
In the case of Huether v. Sharpe, 2025 ONCA 140, the Court of Appeal emphasized the modern rule that requires the complete reading of a statute with principled attention given to the grammatical and ordinary meaning of the statutory text while keeping such in harmony with the scheme, purpose, and intent, of the legislation. These principles align with the foundational approach set out by the Supreme Court within Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Re), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27, by highlighting the importance of context and objective in legal interpretation. Specifically, the Huether and Rizzo cases state:
[31] The modern rule of statutory interpretation requires that the words of a statute are to be read “in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense, harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament”: Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Re), 1998 CanLII 837 (SCC), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27, at para. 21, citing Elmer A. Driedger, Construction of Statutes, 2nd ed. (Toronto: Butterworths, 1983), at p. 87. The goal of the interpretive exercise “is to find harmony between the words of the statute and the intended object”: R. v. Breault, 2023 SCC 9, 481 D.L.R. (4th) 195, at para. 26, quoting MediaQMI inc. v. Kamel, 2021 SCC 23, [2021] 1 S.C.R. 899, at para. 39.
21 Although much has been written about the interpretation of legislation (see, e.g., Ruth Sullivan, Statutory Interpretation (1997); Ruth Sullivan, Driedger on the Construction of Statutes (3rd ed. 1994) (hereinafter “Construction of Statutes”); Pierre-André Côté, The Interpretation of Legislation in Canada (2nd ed. 1991)), Elmer Driedger in Construction of Statutes (2nd ed. 1983) best encapsulates the approach upon which I prefer to rely. He recognizes that statutory interpretation cannot be founded on the wording of the legislation alone. At p. 87 he states:
Today there is only one principle or approach, namely, the words of an Act are to be read in their entire context and in their grammatical and ordinary sense harmoniously with the scheme of the Act, the object of the Act, and the intention of Parliament.
Recent cases which have cited the above passage with approval include: R. v. Hydro-Québec, 1997 CanLII 318 (SCC), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 213**; Royal Bank of Canada v. Sparrow Electric Corp., 1997 CanLII 377 (SCC), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 411; Verdun v. Toronto-Dominion Bank, 1996 CanLII 186 (SCC), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 550; Friesen v. Canada, 1995 CanLII 62 (SCC), [1995] 3 S.C.R. 103.
22 I also rely upon s. 10 of the Interpretation Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 219, which provides that every Act “shall be deemed to be remedial” and directs that every Act shall “receive such fair, large and liberal construction and interpretation as will best ensure the attainment of the object of the Act according to its true intent, meaning and spirit”.
Conclusion
Statutory interpretation is a crucial skill and plays a pivotal role in ensuring that the law is applied correctly and fairly. By interpreting statutes with precision and clarity in accordance with established guidelines rather than a confusing or arbitrary manner, the integrity of law in a democratic society is upheld and proper justice in the resolution of legal disputes may be done.