As noted above, the Supreme Court in MPAO held the fundamental purpose of s.
The first alternative--the "constitutive" model of freedom of association was roundly rejected by the Supreme Court in MPAO. The same model may be rejected regarding human rights codes for the same reasons.
See also Justice Rothstein's dissent in MPAO at para 169.
(96) Professor Etherington has suggested MPAO has relegated Fraser to "rulings that shall be ignored": Etherington, supra note 40 at 447.
(118) In both MPAO and SFL, the Supreme Court again endorses the
opinions in MPAO and SFL, Rothstein J challenged the idea that these
his dissent in MPAO, Rothstein J deduced that the logical conclusion of