The Anti-Inflation Act was passed in 1975, on recommendation of the
Bank Of Canada , to control the growing inflation of the past several years. Due to growing unease with the Act, the federal government put two questions to the Supreme Court on the validity of the Act. The major question being whether the Act was
Ultra Vires of the federal government.
First, the Court noted that the subject-matter of the Act being "inflation", made it impossible to assign to one of the enumerated powers in the
Constitution Act, 1867 . Consequently, the Act would only be able to be upheld under the
Peace, Order And Good Government power under the Constitution which allowed the federal government to legislate in matters related to "emergencies" or matters of "national concern". The Court looked at both options and found that the law could be saved under the "emergency" power of the p.o.g.g. power.
In 1997, the Supreme Court found in the ''
Provincial Judges Reference '' that independent commissions should recommend the salaries of judges. If governments reject the recommendations, the Supreme Court said courts should analyze these rejections in the same way it analyzed the Anti-Inflation Act in this case. In ''
Provincial Court Judges' Assn. Of New Brunswick V. New Brunswick (Minister Of Justice) '' (2005), the Supreme Court clarified that that did not mean an economic emergency was needed to justify not following recommendations. It merely referred to a reviewing method to determine whether the rejection was rational.
