Court reasoning for the decision. R. v. Morgentaler 1988 1 S.C.R. 30 Supreme Court of Canada The three defendants were charged with conspiracy to induce a miscarriage using a surgical method of abortion, in violation of Article 251 of the Penal Code of the time. Doctors said he was having an abortion at a clinic in Toronto. The patient she was involved with was a woman who did not have a certificate from a accredited hospital's abortion treatment board. At the time, this was a legal requirement. At trial she was acquitted by a jury of doctors. The King appealed this acquittal to the Ontario Court of Appeal. Defendant cross-appealed based on his belief that the Abortion Act, in particular Section 251, was unconstitutional and that he violated several of his sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Ontario Court of Appeal overturned the jury's acquittal and ordered a new trial. Before that happened, the doctor appealed to Canada's Supreme Court.Several issues were brought before the court, but most importantly, Article 251 of the Penal Code was replaced by Article 2 of the Charter. whether it violated or denied the rights and freedoms guaranteed by Articles (a), 7, 12 and 15; In a majority vote, Supreme Court Justice Brian Dixon ruled that his section of the Penal Code was unconstitutional because he violated Section 7, "Safety of Persons," of the Charter. Dixon states that Article 251 is "...a law whereby women are forced to give birth against their own priorities and desires, impose serious delays, and increase trauma to women who meet the criteria." Evidence has shown that abortion procedures are not the same across Canada. Many hospitals did not have enough doctors to set up abortion boards. Many hospitals were not set up for her to perform abortions. And many hospitals didn't even appoint abortion boards. After it was ruled that the law had disenfranchised the woman and that she had not complied with the principles of fundamental justice, the Court would decide whether Section 251 could be justified under Section 1 of the Charter. had to be. Because legal abortion rights were not available to her in many parts of Canada, the Supreme Court ruled that the abortion law was unconstitutional and nullified it