Comprehensive Analysis of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

This report examines the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, focusing on its establishment, purpose, and impact on Canadian society. It highlights two crucial aspects: equal protection without discrimination and fundamental democratic rights. The report also explores the debate surrounding the Charter's influence, arguing for its importance in safeguarding minority rights and societal welfare. Furthermore, the assignment presents a case study involving a real estate agent, Patrick, and a property owner, Kerry, detailing a scenario where Patrick attempts to sell Kerry's convenience store. The analysis offers legal advice to Kerry, exploring her options in relation to the contract signed by Patrick and the potential liabilities and risks involved, including agent ratification, and the possibility of counter offers. It concludes by recommending a course of action that minimizes risk and protects Kerry's interests. The report references relevant legal and academic sources to support its arguments.

1
Topic
Name
Institutional Affiliation

2
1
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom was established in the year 1984, and this
was done with the intention of replacing bill of Rights that had been established in 1960. As
much it encompasses most of the rights that had been covered in the Bill of rights, which had
preceded it, the Canadian Charter goes beyond protection of human rights and increases
protection that ought to be offered to Canadians. The Charter achieves the almost maximum
protection by increasing the freedoms and rights that should be offered. The Charter was
implemented to help tackle the instituted abuse of people’s rights and freedom when court
rulings were being implemented (Dalley, 2010).
A critical aspect that is outlined by the Charter is the fact that all persons in Canada ought
to be offered equal protection, and in absence of discrimination of any form on the grounds of
origin, race, age, sex, disability of physical or mental nature, or nationality. In the past, after the
introduction of the Charter of rights and freedoms, some states didn’t deem it necessary to uptake
the Charter rights immediately they were implemented, and instead continued to use the Bill of
Rights as it was viewed that the latter was quite sufficient in protecting the interest of Canadians
(Armour, Hansmann, & Kraakman, 2009). However, due to changing times and increased
diversity of Canada, all states in ended up adopting the Charter rights.
Secondly, the important aspect associated with the Charter is the concept of fundamental
democratic rights and freedoms that ought to be accorded to every citizen. The right to vote has
strongly been fought for over the years since this enables people to participate in democratic
processes where they can select representatives who will help them in the law-making (Jackman
& Porter, 2008). Canada respects this right and all persons born in the country are considered to
be citizens by right, and are therefore liable to vote once they attain the proper age. The
importance of democracy is that it eliminates the possibility of discrimination by limiting the
strength and reach of the ruling class by creating a collective bargain (French, 2015).
Canada has definitely improved in the aftermath of implementing the Charter Rights. I
believe that the Charter helps to secure the rights of minority groups while promoting societal
welfare.

3
2
The first step would be to offer advice to Kerry that Patrick was not under any legal
obligation to sign an offer that had been offered on behalf of the former. Conventionally, an
agreement established between a real estate agent and a property owner, which is normally
established in form of the standard listing consensus, never provides mandate to the agent such
that the latter can establish a contract on the part of the real estate owner. Since the engagement
that had been established between Kerry and Patrick was a standard listing agreement, and most
importantly Kerry had not specified that Patrick could enter into a biding contract on her behalf,
then legally, she cannot be blamed for the mishap and she cannot be liable for the contract that
was signed for selling the store (Munday, 2010).
Legal stipulations dictate that no contract exists as much as Patrick may have taken upon
himself to save the situation, thereby, leading Paul and Rick to believe that he had the legal
authority to sign the contractual papers. Agents who have not been given the authority and
establish contracts with their parties end up being liable to the latter for breaching an authority
warranty. In the case that Kerry feels that the established contract doesn’t fall within her
expectation, she can opt out of the agreement and leave Patrick to carry the burden for signing
the agreement (Kelly & Manfredi, 2010).
At this point, Kerry has three viable options that she can pursue.
Firstly, Kerry has the choice of accepting the agreement hat has been established between
Patrick and the third parties, that is, at the price of $250000. This would bring up the concept of
agent ratification. Agency Ratification arises when an agent stands on the part of the property
owner, and vice versa. Various reasons might motivate Kerry to take up this option, and most
importantly protection of her reputation. Since Patrick has already created the notion that he can
represent the property owner in the minds of Rick and Paul, it is essential that she agrees to the
terms that have been established since doing the contrary would destroy the reputation of Kerry
in the small world of real estate management as a person who goes back on promises.
The second option would involve refusing the agreement since it is not legally binding.
Kerry can then fire Patrick and replace him with another person. However, this has the potential
of scaring away future buyers since information might end up spreading that Kerry is not trust

4
worthy in this field. Kerry could also pursue legal options although this option falls short of the
fact that Kerry doesn’t have adequate proof (Uberoi, 2009).
The third option would involve Kerry making a counter offer to the buyers at a range that
would be suitable to satisfy her interests. However, this would lead to the termination of the
previously established contract by making it to be non-binding. The choice is still risky as Rick
and Paul already assume that they have acquired the store. Hence, they may end up thinking that
Kerry is trying to take advantage of them, or worse, they were duped into establishing an
agreement only so that they could be forced to renegotiate the whole deal. Likewise, this option
has the possibility of scaring away potential buyers (Ryder, 2008).
I believe that the best choice is one that involves allowing the deal to flow through
without any objections since this reduces the possibility of too much risk. Failing to do so would
create a bad review for Kerry, and if Patrick is forced to leave the company that he contracts for,
he may end up leaving too many negative reviews, which may tarnish the general image of the
company. Clients fear bad reviews, and selling the store for $250,000 helps Kerry not to uptake
any legal costs that would generally reduce her profit margin. Most importantly, currently the
property has a wiling buyer, and there is no guarantee for Kerry that another client will desire to
buy the product immediately once Rick and Paul forfeit the previous deal.

5
References
Armour, J., Hansmann, H., & Kraakman, R. (2009). Agency problems, legal strategies, and enforcement.
Dalley, P. J. (2010). A theory of agency law. U. Pitt. L. Rev., 72, 495.
French, P. A. (2015). Corporate moral agency. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management, 1-3.
Jackman, M., & Porter, B. (2008). Socio-economic rights under the Canadian Charter. Social Rights
Jurisprudence: Emerging Trends in International and Comparative Law (New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2008).
Kelly, J. B., & Manfredi, C. P. (Eds.). (2010). Contested constitutionalism: reflections on the Canadian
charter of rights and freedoms. UBC Press.
Munday, R. (2010). Agency: Law and principles. Oxford University Press.
Ryder, B. (2008). The Canadian conception of equal religious citizenship. LAW AND RELIGIOUS
PLURALISM IN CANADA, Richard Moon ed.
Uberoi, V. (2009). Multiculturalism and the Canadian charter of rights and freedoms. Political
Studies, 57(4), 805-827.