“It is axiomatic that a person who has a constitutional right has the right to assert it in ordinary legal proceedings subject to the limitations in the jurisprudence to which I will refer later.
The constitutional issue to which Mr. Hill’s claim gives rise is whether s. 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, together with any applicable treaties, completely displace or otherwise modify the application of the FLA, the CLRA and associated rules to this family law dispute between Indigenous parties who live in Ontario. This is a complex legal issue with serious implications for the immediate parties and more broadly.
The Superior Court of Justice has jurisdiction to decide the constitutional issue. It is a court of inherent and plenary jurisdiction, and has authority over disputes between citizens and residents subject to the provisions of legislation and the Constitution, with associated rights of appeal: Canada (A.G.) v. Law Society of British Columbia, 1982 CanLII 29 (SCC), [1982] 2 S.C.R. 307 at pp. 326-27.”