Source: https://archdisabilitylaw.ca/services/test-case-litigation/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 00:16:52+00:00

Document:
ARCH represents groups and individuals in test case litigation. These are cases whose outcome will affect a large number of people with disabilities or will significantly affect the law as it relates to the rights of people with disabilities in Ontario. We focus our test case litigation work in the priority areas set by our Board of Directors.
Over the years, ARCH has been involved in many leading disability related cases, including cases at the Supreme Court of Canada. ARCH has represented persons with disabilities in significant and seminal test cases including Clark v Clark (1983), 40 O.R. (2d) 383, Roberts v Ontario (1994), 117 D.L.R. (4th) 297, and Eaton v Brant County Board of Education  1 S.C.R. 241.
Nova Scotia (Minister of Health) v. J.J.,  1 S.C.R. 177.
Auton (Guardian ad litem of) v. British Columbia (Attorney General),  3 S.C.R. 657.
Newfoundland (Treasury Board) v. N.A.P.E.,  3 S.C.R. 381.
Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Martin; Nova Scotia (Workers’ Compensation Board) v. Laseur,  2 S.C.R. 504.
Lovelace v. Ontario,  1 S.C.R. 950.
British Columbia (Super. of Motor Vehicles) v. British Columbia (Council of Human Rights), 3 S.C.R. 868 [Grismer].
Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute),  2 S.C.R. 625.
Battlefords and District Co-operative Ltd. v. Gibbs,  3 S.C.R. 566.
Weatherall v. Canada (Attorney General),  2 S.C.R. 872.
Central Okanagan School District No. 23 v. Renaud,  2 S.C.R. 970.
Canadian Council of Churches v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration),  1 S.C.R. 236.
Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia, 1 S.C.R. 143.
Bhinder v. Canadian National Railway Co.,  2 S.C.R. 561. ARCH intervened on behalf of the Canadian Association for the Mentally Retarded.
Ontario Human Rights Commission v. Simpsons-Sears,  2 S.C.R. 536.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.