1. Besides the Courts' stated grounds for denying a constitutional remedy for the applications, might there have been more practical reasons for declining to rule on VANOC's choice of included events?
2. The British Columbia Court of Appeal noted that "where the law is not implicated in discrimination or inequality, s. 15(1) is not engaged" (emphasis added). Do you know of any other Canadian legal provisionsoutside the Charterthat may be "engaged" when discrimination results because of something other than the application of a law?