DFO’s Owner-Operator Policy Successfully Challenged
In the case of Robinson v Attorney General of Canada, 2020 FC 942, Mr. Robinson, who suffered from a medical condition making it impossible for him to stand for more than a few hours at a time without suffering from throbbing and swelling in his legs, and therefore unable to personally fish his licence, argued that the OOP violated his equality rights under the Charter.
 Charter protections must be affected as little as reasonably possible in light of the applicable statutory objectives. This does not mean that the administrative decision maker must choose the option that limits the Charter protection least. However, if the decision-maker rejects a reasonably available option or avenue that would reduce the impact on the protected right, while still permitting sufficient furtherance of the relevant statutory objectives, such a decision would not represent the required proportionate balancing.
The case can be found here: https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2020/2020fc942/2020fc942.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAOIm1hcml0aW1lIGxhdyIAAAAAAQ&resultIndex=2
An article about the case can be found here: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/disabled-lobster-fisherman-seeking-substitute-operator-1.4561642