Provincial laws should be rendered constitutionally inoperative in relation to federal subject matters in only limited circumstances

Edwards Estate v. Food Family Credit Union, 2011 ONCA 497 rather unsurprisingly, holds that general limitation periods in provincial statutes apply to bankruptcy proceedings (see also Gingras v. General Motors, [1975] 1 S.C.R. and Employers Liability Assurance Corp. v. Ideal Petroleum, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 230). Of more general interest is a discussion of conflict/paramountcy. The Court holds:

[5]              Nothing in the development of conflict/paramountcy doctrine since these decisions calls into question their continuing validity. In recent years, the Supreme Court of Canada has consistently emphasized that provincial laws should be rendered constitutionally inoperative in relation to federal subject matters in only limited circumstances, namely where (1) the provincial law is in an operational conflict with a federal law, such that there is an impossibility of dual compliance or (2) the operation of the provincial law would frustrate the purpose of the federal law: see Canadian Western Bank v. Alberta, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 3 at paras. 74-75.