{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02204928664072633, 'fraction_numerical': 0.018158236057068743, 'mean_word_length': 4.553956834532374, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Borowski v. Attorney General of Canada, 9 March 1989.


 The plaintiff sought a ruling that sections of the Canadian Criminal Code permitting therapeutic abortions were inconsistent with provisions of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He contended that a fetus was entitled to the rights to life and equal protection and benefit of law guaranteed to persons under the Charter. The court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal from an adverse lower court ruling. It held that the case was moot because the sections of the Criminal Code challenged had recently been declared unconstitutional (see R. v. Morgentaler in ARPL, Vol. 14, 1988, Section 240). It also concluded that the plaintiff lacked standing since he had not claimed that any of his own rights had been violated.
