Judge throws out interprovincial booze limits

I would say no, only because the federal government took some steps towards making it possible to bring wine and spirits between provinces in 2015.

Is it a significant step towards this? Perhaps.

First of all, the ruling could be overturned on appeal. So we should hope that the ruling is sound.

If it isn't appealed, another province would not be bound by the ruling. So you could be prosecuted in Ontario. And no guarantee the judge would come to the same conclusion.

Now if a Federal court of appeal or supreme court ruled on it, that would apply to all provinces.

Also, the ruling was based on a case where an individual was bringing it cross border, likely for personal use. It m,ay not apply to interprovincial trade.

Will Calgary begin supplying all of Canada? We should all stay tuned....

@Nozinan Part of the issue is that the RCMP were only targeting people bringing more than five cases of beer over the border, even though people carrying four cases were also breaking the law. The judge didn't see that as a fair application of the law.

Add to the fact that the decision applies only to a specific segment of the NB Liquor Act, which may not have equivalencies in other provincial acts, and that it was a discussion of personal use, not commercial use, this could be tied up in the courts for a while yet, and these issues in and of themselves have nothing to do with Canada Post's rules on the shipment of hazardous goods...

@YakLord

I don't think the issue with Canada post applies for 2 reasons:

1. Retailers can use other shippers to send orders.

2. No one is compelling retailers to sell Lambertus across provincial lines....

The federal government has now commented on it:

cbc.ca/beta/news/…

The link in my last comment is worth reading for some commentary by other interested parties as well.

@Nelom I especially liked the online commentary about the differential in the cost of chicken wings. Though I haven't served chicken wings at my scotch tastings in at least 2 years...

@Nozinan Hehe. I wasn't so much referring to reader comments, but was referring to comments in the article by non-spokespeople:

"Arnold Schwisberg, a Toronto lawyer with an expertise in fighting trade barriers between the provinces, joined the legal team. He described yesterday's ruling as a "bold decision" that takes the law "in a new direction."

"Judge LeBlanc's decision is groundbreaking," he said. "No judge has ever ruled before that section 121 (of the Canadian Constitution) does in fact exist for the purpose of creating a free trade zone in Canada."

Schwisberg says that he expects the case to be appealed to a higher court and predicts it will someday end up being heard in the Supreme Court of Canada...

"This decision has the potential to affect the very commercial fabric of our country," he added."

And:

"Conservative MP Dan Albas, critic for Interprovincial Trade and Labour Mobility, said that because trade between the provinces is protected by the constitution, the federal government should refer the case to the High Court now to ensure the issue is settled properly.

"I hope this case puts heat on the federal, provincial and territorial governments to come to a consensus and see a new agreement on internal trade," said the MP for Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola. "I also hope that provinces back away from spending lots of money to protect their provincial monopolies.""

@Nelom

Sure... but if the original ruling was sound a higher court may decline to hear an appeal. The Supreme Court actually hears very few cases per year and they choose very selectively.

@Nelom For those not aware, the Okanagan-Similkameen area mentioned is the heart of BC's wine region. And there's been a lot of controversy and commentary about the fact that a visitor from another province can't call a winery they'd visited during their trip and order, say, a case of wine--it's illegal for the winery to ship their product to a private buyer outside BC. And, of course, many of the wineries are too small and don't have enough output to be considered by, say, LCBO (hell, even BCLDB won't carry them--it's easier for us to by wine from Chile than from some of my our favourite wineries).

I have to say that Canada alcohol laws seem even more uptight than Swedish ones. How come?

@Nozinan Oh, I'm by no means saying it's a done deal or even necessarily indicative that cross-border shipping is coming any time soon. But I do find all these rumblings by various parties to be a positive sign. Any discussion that may go towards opening things up a bit is a good thing in my books.

@Alexsweden That's not quite accurate. Each province decide on their own how to sell alcohol, so while there are some provinces that rival Sweden's "uptightedness", like Ontario, there are some provinces, like Quebec, that are much more liberal in their alcohol policies.

Ontario, the province I live in, I would argue is more or less on par with Sweden. Although there are of course differences. In Ontario the drinking age is 19 for both bar and store purchases, compared to Sweden's 18/20 split. In Ontario you can only buy wine and hard liquor in one chain of stores, just like in Sweden. In Ontario you can buy regular beer in two chains of stores and some grocery stores, compared to one in Sweden. In Ontario you can't buy any alcohol in any convenience stores or gas stations, compared to Sweden where you can buy beer with

@Alexsweden As Nelom says, part of the problem here in Canada is the patwork of laws across different provinces. Some of these laws are mired in historical protectionism--interprovincial liquor transport laws are a good example. There are Canadian beer brands which were widely available across the US long before they could legally be sold in any Canadian province other than the one they were produced in.

I've mentioned before that my favourite whisky retailer is in Alberta, the next province over from where I live. And they're happy to sell online and ship--but only in Alberta. It's illegal for stores to ship alcohol to retail customers outside of their own province. Hence, you'll find a lack of online whisky retailers in Canada (and Canadian Connosr members complaining about the fact...).

Is there a maximum post length? My previous reply got cut off mid-sentence...

What I intended to say was:

In Ontario you can't buy any alcohol in any convenience stores or gas stations, compared to Sweden where you can buy beer with less than 3.5% alc in those kinds of stores.

If I've gotten any facts wrong, please do correct me.

As for why this is the case... I'm sure there's various reasons to do with our cultural and religious heritage, I'm not knowledgeable enough to talk about that, but I do know that the LCBO was created as a way of bringing alcohol sales back to Ontario after about a decade of prohibition in the early 1900s. And then it just stuck around. Hopefully others here can give a more in-depth answer than that. :)

@Nelom

Technically, you CAN buy alcohol in gas stations in Ontario. Up to 10% ABV. Un-aged corn spirit.

But you can't drink it because the other 90% is gasoline...