WEA purchased land in Toronto to build a house on then raffle it off. The land was restricted by covenant say that it was “not to be sold to Jews or persons of objectionable nature.” The WEA applied to have the covenant declared invalid.
*Say that it was void because it was racially restrictive and against public policy
*Also that it was against the Racial Discrimination Act
Is the covenant, not selling to Jews, against public policy?
Contractual provisions if injurious to the public can be void on the grounds of public policy
Public policy is a variable thing and must fluctuate with circumstances.
Whatever is injurious to the interests of the public is void, on the ground of public policy (Horner v. Graves (1831)).
Covenant is void because it is offensive to the public policy of this jurisdiction.
Looks at a lot of soft law.
The natural law theory best describes this case