Sections 29, 29.1 or 29.2 of the Copyright Act identify the permissible purposes. Prior to CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, the list of purposes was considered to be exhaustive. In the case of Compagnie Générale des Établissements Michelin-Michelin & Cie v. National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada),Compagnie Générale des Établissements Michelin-Michelin & Cie v. National Automobile, Aerospace, Transportation and General Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada), [1997] 2 FC 306 the Federal Court of Canada rejected the defendant's assertion that utilizing the copyright of the plaintiff on a pamphlet criticising the labour practices of the plaintiff in a labour dispute could qualify as fair dealing, because the infringement was a parody and not listed as a permissible purpose. Following CCH, it is no longer certain whether the purposes listed are exhaustive as they are to be broadly interpreted.CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada [2004] 1 S.C.R. 339, at paragraphs 48 and 54 However, see the case of Canwest Mediaworks Publications Inc. v. Horizon Publications Ltd.Canwest Mediaworks Publications Inc. v. Horizon Publications Ltd., et. al 2008 BCSC 1609 which continued to apply the restrictive approach to permissible purposes.
