Alberta v Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony

It was left out, it was not considered, and the state did not justify that glaring omission.

no state evidence and so this case is extremely different than wilson colony in three three ways i mean of course there's the the finding of um infringement of section 2a but when it comes to justification three reasons this case is very different than wilson colony pipa is not universal in its application Having a photo taken for your driver's license in Alberta, in Wilson Colony, was universal.

There were no exceptions.

PIPA is replete with specific exemptions and blanket exclusions.

A second reason, this case is very different than Wilson Colony when it comes to Section 1, is in Wilson Colony, the state had deduced multiple, numerous affidavits and evidence to explain why it was necessary to have no exemptions to this photo requirement.

It was necessary to have a universal application, whereas in this case, the state has offered no evidence as to why it could protect businesses through tailored exemptions, other interests through Section 2, and yet give no consideration to protecting fundamental freedom of religion and purely religious activities and so forth.

Right, now there's two, it seems to me there's two situations in which some form of balancing would have to take place.

The Commissioner's review of the documents will be limited for the purpose of deciding the questions of fact and law in the course of any inquiry under Section 50-1 respecting LW's and GW's claims that they have been properly denied access to their own personal information.