Simon's Legal Resources

Statutory Interpretation - Modern Principle - 'Context'

. Canada v. Independent Order of Foresters

In Canada v. Independent Order of Foresters (Fed CA, 2026) the Federal Court of Appeal allowed a Crown appeal, this involving the taxation of "life insurance and accident and sickness insurance (accident insurance)" operated by a fraternal benefit society (which themselves are tax-exempt under the ITA).

Here the court considers the 'context' element of the modern principle of statutory interpretation:

[53] The modern principle of interpretation requires that one’s initial impression from reading the text be "“tested against the inferences that may be drawn from considering other provisions of the [""Income Tax Act], its components and its overall scheme”": Ruth Sullivan, The Construction of Statutes, 7th ed (Toronto: LexisNexis Canada, 2022) at §13.02 [1]. This is part of the contextual analysis that courts must consider when interpreting statutory provisions.

....

[60] The context of a legislative provision includes the statute as a whole: Sullivan at §13.01. In reading the Income Tax Act as a whole, one assumes that its provisions fit together to form a coherent and workable scheme: Sullivan at §13.02 [3].

....

[67] Finally, the external context of a provision includes the setting in which the legislation was intended to operate and in fact operates. To use the words of Ruth Sullivan, "“[t]he key assumption here is that legislation is not an academic exercise. It is a response to circumstances in the real world”": Sullivan at § 1.05 [4]. We must consider "“how the statutory scheme operates on the ground”": West Fraser Mills Ltd. v. British Columbia (Workers’ Compensation Appeal Tribunal), 2018 SCC 22 at para. 41.

. Reference re iGaming Ontario

In Reference re iGaming Ontario (Ont CA, 2025) the Ontario Court of Appeal considered a 'reference' [under CJA 8 'References to Court of Appeal'] regarding whether "legal online gaming and sports betting [would] remain lawful under the Criminal Code if its users were permitted to participate in games and betting involving individuals outside of Canada".

Here the court considers the 'context' element of the statutory interpretation test:

[140] A contextual analysis examines the statute’s structure and scheme, presuming that its provisions form a cohesive, internally consistent framework: Heritage Capital Corp. v. Equitable Trust Co., 2016 SCC 19, [2016] 1 S.C.R. 306, at para. 28.