NCA Canadian Constitutional Law Exam: Syllabus, Format and How to Prepare (2026–27)

Canadian Constitutional Law is one of the five mandatory NCA subjects, and one of the broadest: federalism, Indigenous rights and the Charter in one three-hour paper. This guide sets out what the syllabus requires, how the sample exam is built, and how to prepare.

Checked against the NCA's Canadian Constitutional Law syllabus (revised for January 2023) and sample exam on October 25, 2026.

The exam at a glance

• Syllabus version: "revised for January 2023". The NCA can update it without notice, so confirm the current one when you register.
• Length: 3 hours, online, with a live remote proctor.
• Open book, paper only: any printed materials, nothing electronic.
• Marking: pass/fail, with 50% as the pass mark.
• Question types: the syllabus says the exam may be all problem questions, or a mix of problem questions, short answer questions (which can be true/false or multiple choice) and short essay questions.
• Sample exam structure: 100 marks in four Parts: five short statements to assess as true, false or in between (25 marks); six questions on which level of government can legislate on a subject (30 marks); a problem on the Part V amending procedures (15 marks); and a Charter problem written as an advice memo (30 marks).
• Caveat: the NCA says the sample shows the style of questions only. It does not reflect the content, structure or value of questions on a real exam, which vary from session to session.

What the syllabus covers

The syllabus has four Parts and 25 numbered topics, each listing constitutional provisions, a Hogg chapter and cases. All required readings are examinable.

Part 1: Basic Concepts

• Sources and nature of the Constitution: the written and unwritten parts of the Constitution, with the Secession Reference.
• Amending procedures: Part V of the Constitution Act, 1982 (ss 38–49) and secession.

Part 2: Distribution of Legislative Powers

• Federalism: ss 91–95 of the Constitution Act, 1867.
• Judicial review and principles of interpretation: s 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and how courts characterise laws.
• Property and civil rights (s 92(13)): the main provincial power.
• Trade and commerce (s 91(2)).
• Peace, order, and good government: the opening words of s 91.
• Criminal law (s 91(27), with s 92(15)).
• Ancillary powers, paramountcy and interjurisdictional immunity: the doctrines that manage overlap between federal and provincial laws.

Part 3: Aboriginal Rights and the Constitution

• Sections 25 and 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, then Aboriginal rights, Aboriginal title, treaty rights and the duty to consult.

Part 4: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

• Interpretation and application (s 32): who the Charter binds.
• Override (s 33): the notwithstanding clause.
• Four core rights: freedom of conscience and religion (s 2(a)), freedom of expression (s 2(b)), life, liberty and security of the person (s 7), and equality (s 15).
• Limitation of rights (s 1) and remedies (ss 24 and 52).

Required materials

The syllabus says the exam tests knowledge from three sources:

1. The constitutional text listed under each topic.
2. The listed cases, mostly Supreme Court of Canada decisions, some assigned only for specific paragraphs.
3. Peter Hogg, Constitutional Law of Canada, Student Edition (Toronto: Carswell), which the syllabus describes as published in a revised version annually. You are told to use the most recent student edition, or the loose-leaf version.

The syllabus warns against relying on Hogg alone: the cases are the authoritative statements of the law.

The leading cases and tests

These syllabus cases carry most answers. Read them (or the assigned paragraphs); the notes below are a map, not a substitute.

Division of powers

• Pith and substance (R v Morgentaler, 1993; Canadian Western Bank v Alberta, 2007): identify the law's dominant purpose and effect, then assign it to a head of power. Morgentaler looks past a provincial law's form to find it was in substance criminal law. Canadian Western Bank sets out the modern approach, including double aspect.
• General trade and commerce (General Motors v City National Leasing, 1989): the indicia of a valid general regulation of trade, including a regulatory scheme overseen by an agency, concern with trade as a whole rather than one industry, and provincial incapacity. Reference re Securities Act (2011) found a proposed federal securities regime reached too far into day-to-day regulation under provincial property and civil rights.
• Peace, order, and good government: Reference re Anti-Inflation Act (1976) on the emergency branch; References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act (2021), which restated the national concern test: a threshold of concern to Canada as a whole, singleness, distinctiveness and indivisibility, and the scale of impact on provincial jurisdiction.
• Criminal law: the Margarine Reference (1949) requires a prohibition, backed by a penalty, aimed at a criminal law purpose. It was applied in the Firearms Reference (2000) and Reference re Genetic Non-Discrimination Act (2020).
• Ancillary powers (General Motors; Quebec v Lacombe, 2010): whether an intruding provision is sufficiently integrated into a valid scheme, with a stricter test the deeper the intrusion.
• Paramountcy (Rothmans, Benson & Hedges v Saskatchewan, 2005): a valid provincial law is inoperative only where dual compliance is impossible or it frustrates the purpose of a federal law.
• Interjurisdictional immunity (Canadian Western Bank; Quebec v Canadian Owners and Pilots Association, 2010): a provincial law that impairs the core of a federal head of power does not apply to it. The Court has said the doctrine should be applied with restraint.

Indigenous rights

• R v Sparrow (1990): "existing" rights, extinguishment requiring a clear and plain intention, and the test for justifying an infringement.
• R v Van der Peet (1996): a practice, custom or tradition integral to the group's distinctive culture before contact. R v Powley (2003) adapts the test for Métis rights, looking to the period before effective European control.
• Tsilhqot'in Nation v British Columbia (2014): Aboriginal title rests on sufficient, continuous and exclusive occupation at the time the Crown asserted sovereignty.
• R v Marshall (1999): treaty interpretation and the honour of the Crown.
• Haida Nation v British Columbia (2004): the duty to consult arises when the Crown knows of a potential right or title and contemplates conduct that might adversely affect it. What consultation requires varies along a spectrum.

Charter

• Application: Eldridge (1997) and Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority (2009) on who is bound under s 32.
• Override: Ford v Quebec (1988) holds that s 33 imposes formal requirements only, chiefly an express declaration.
• Religion: Syndicat Northcrest v Amselem (2004) protects a sincerely held belief or practice with a nexus to religion against non-trivial interference. Mouvement laïque québécois v Saguenay (2015) adds the state's duty of religious neutrality.
• Expression: Irwin Toy (1989) asks whether the activity has expressive content, whether its method or location removes protection (Montréal v 2952-1366 Québec, 2005), and whether the government restricts expression in purpose or effect. Whatcott (2013) deals with hate speech.
• Section 7: PHS Community Services (2011), Bedford (2013) and Carter (2015) apply the principles of fundamental justice against arbitrariness, overbreadth and gross disproportionality.
• Equality: Andrews (1989), Kapp (2008) and Fraser v Canada (2020). Fraser confirms a two-step test: does the law, on its face or in its impact, create a distinction based on an enumerated or analogous ground; and does it impose burdens or deny benefits in a way that reinforces, perpetuates or exacerbates disadvantage?
• Section 1: R v Oakes (1986) requires a pressing and substantial objective, rational connection, minimal impairment, and proportionality between benefits and harms. Hutterian Brethren (2009) applies the final balancing stage.
• Remedies: Vriend (1998) on reading in, Vancouver v Ward (2010) on Charter damages, and Ontario v G (2020) on suspended declarations of invalidity.

2027 exam dates

Canadian Constitutional Law is offered four times in 2027:

• January 5–8
• April 6–9
• July 6–9
• October 4–7

Registration opens about six to eight weeks before each session and closes about three and a half weeks later. See the full NCA exam schedule for 2027.

How to prepare

1. Tab your binder by the 25 syllabus topics. Under each: the constitutional text, the test in your own words, and a one-line note per case.
2. Print the constitutional text separately. Sections 91 and 92, Part V and the Charter come up constantly.
3. Make a one-page heads-of-power table with the leading case for each. The sample's jurisdiction questions ask whether Parliament, the provinces or both can legislate on a subject, citing heads of power and cases.
4. Practise five-mark statements in about nine minutes each: take a position, state the rule, cite the case. The sample says your reasoning matters more than the label.
5. Write Charter problems in a fixed order: application (s 32), whether the right is infringed, s 1 justification, then remedy.
6. Budget by marks. The suggested times in the sample add up to 200 minutes, more than the three hours you actually have. Plan on about 1.8 minutes per mark and keep a few minutes at the end.

Common mistakes

• Copying prepared answers. The syllabus and the sample both strongly discourage "boilerplate" answers. Examiners recognise them, and they often state the law wrongly or out of date.
• Stopping at the rule. Problem questions are marked on applying the rule to the facts and reaching a supported conclusion.
• Skipping steps in federalism analysis. Characterise each law first; paramountcy only matters if both laws are valid.
• Neglecting Part 3. Indigenous rights are a full Part of the syllabus.
• Descriptive essays. The syllabus asks for an argument that answers the specific question, supported by syllabus authority.

Sources

• NCA: Canadian Constitutional Law syllabus (revised for January 2023)
• NCA: Canadian Constitutional Law sample exam
• NCA: Exam outlines and samples

Lexn is an independent study platform and is not affiliated with the NCA or the Federation of Law Societies of Canada. Always confirm the current syllabus and exam rules with the NCA.

---

Preparing for Canadian Constitutional Law? Lexn's Canadian Constitutional Law study guide follows the syllabus topic by topic and prints cleanly for your binder. Read Part I free. Then test yourself under real conditions with a timed exam simulation, and bring your questions to the Canadian Constitutional Law Study Circle.