Supreme Court Rules on Swingers Club

Anyone looking for another reason to move to Canada should read some of what the Supreme Court had to say yesterday.

In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled on two Quebec cases involving swinger’s clubs that were allowing “on premise” sex to occur.

The ruling is an interesting one, and reading their decision is a sharp and pleasant reminder (at least for those folks living north of the 49th) of the current difference in the judicial climates of Canada and U.S. In the case against Jean Paul Labaye owner of the members-only club L'Orage, the justices wrote:

"Consensual conduct behind code-locked doors can hardly be supposed to jeopardize a society as vigorous and tolerant as Canadian society."

Particularly exciting is the finding that “community standards” should not be the test for such cases.

Instead the court found that the test for indecency (which is what is behind the Canadian “bawdy house” laws that have been used to shut down swingers clubs, professional dungeons, and bathhouses in the past) should not be community standards, but the harm caused by the activity.

In a moment of serene reasonableness I heard a CBC radio report that the judges acknowledged the difficulty of allowing judges, lawyers, or police alone to determine what community standards are. We’re going into an election, so it was a special holiday present to hear a bit of common sense coming from anyone in a position of power. Maybe some of those judges should be running for office.

Related: Globe and Mail - Supreme Court opens door for 'swingers' clubs

Read the Supreme Court decision regarding the Labaye case

Read the Supreme Court decision regarding the Kouri case