In this case, the plaintiff is a collective of civil society organisations which wants to force the government to cancel its decision to allow the United States of America to test cruise missiles in Canada. The plaintiff argues that those tests are a threat for the Canada and for its environment because it could result in Canada being the target of nuclear attacks.

The plaintiff challenged the decision of the government in front of the first instance courts and then the Federal Appeal Court. Both Court did not follow the argumentation of the plaintiff and held that the separation of powers did not entitle Courts to discuss foreign policy acts of the government.

The plaintiff brought an appeal in front of the Supreme Court. The judges of the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the lower courts and dismissed the appeal. They argued that the threat was too speculative because of the unpredictability of foreign policy decisions of sovereign nations. Thus it would be impossible to show a causal link between the testing of the missile and the increasing nuclear war threat.