OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada has affirmed the constitutionality of a pandemic-related rule that curbed travel to Newfoundland and Labrador for public health reasons.
A 2020 order from the province’s chief medical officer of health limited the circumstances in which non-residents could enter the province due to COVID-19.
In May 2020, Nova Scotia resident Kimberley Taylor asked for an exemption to attend her mother’s burial in Newfoundland.
Taylor’s initial application was denied on May 8, 2020 but a reconsideration request was approved eight days later, allowing her to enter the province.
Although she eventually was granted entry, Taylor sought a court declaration that the travel restrictions breached her mobility rights guaranteed by section 6 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association supported her application.
The Supreme Court of Newfoundland ruled the legislation giving rise to the order was within the competence of the province as a valid public health measure.
The court also found the order violated Taylor’s constitutional right under section 6 to travel anywhere in Canada, but that the circumstances of the pandemic justified the infringement under Section 1 of the Charter.
Newfoundland’s Court of Appeal declined to hear an appeal and a cross-appeal on the basis they were moot, as the travel restrictions were no longer in effect.
The Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear arguments and decide the case on its merits.
In its ruling Friday, a majority of the Supreme Court justices said although the travel restrictions limited constitutional mobility rights, this was a reasonable and justified measure in a free and democratic country during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“In the early days of the pandemic, governments across Canada — including Newfoundland and Labrador — were confronted by a new and deadly disease,” wrote Andromache Karakatsanis and Sheilah Martin for the majority.
“Growing numbers of cases and deaths paired with a lack of concrete medical and scientific evidence created an extraordinarily difficult situation where decisions had to be made swiftly to attempt to protect health and reduce further loss of life,” the judges added.
“These unprecedented circumstances, factoring in the capacity of their health care system and high volume of vulnerable populations, entitled Newfoundland and Labrador to act as it did.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 13, 2026.
Jim Bronskill, The Canadian Press
