(b) the double aspect doctrine; and (c) the “incidental effects”
(a) The “pith and substance” of legislation
 As this court observed in Canada Post Corp. v. Hamilton
(City) (2016), 134 O.R. (3d) 502,  O.J. No. 5368, 2016
ONCA 767, at para. 32, the first step in a division of powers
analysis is to determine the “pith and substance” of the
impugned legislation to determine the “matter” to which the law
relates. This, in turn, requires a consideration of the purpose
and effect of the law. See Canadian Western Bank v. Alberta,
 2 S.C.R. 3,  S.C.J. No. 22, 2007 SCC 22, at
 Where, as here, the statutory provision is part of a larger
scheme, “the pith and substance analysis begins with the challenged provision”, but “the ‘matter’ of the provision must be considered in the context of the larger scheme, as its relationship to
that scheme may be an important consideration in determining
its pith and substance”: Quebec (Attorney General) v. Canada
(Attorney General),  1 S.C.R. 693,  S.C.J. No. 14,
2015 SCC 14, at para. 30.
(b) The “double aspect” doctrine
 This principle holds that “subjects which in one aspect
and for one purpose fall within sect. 92, may in another aspect
and for another purpose, fall within sect. 91”: Reference re: Liquor License Act of 1877 (Ont.),  J.C.J. No. 2, 9 App. Cas.
117 (P.C.), at p. 130 App. Cas.; Canada Post, at para. 43; and
Canadian Western Bank, at para. 30. Where there is a conflict,
in the sense that the provincial law makes it impossible to comply with the federal law, or the operation of the provincial law
frustrates Parliament’s purpose, the conflict must be resolved in
favour of the federal legislation: Canada Post, at para. 45.
(c) The “incidental effects” principle
 A corollary of these principles is that the “incidental
effects” of a law whose pith and substance is within the jurisdiction of the enacting legislature may intrude into the jurisdiction
of the other legislature without impairing its constitutionality:
Canadian Western Bank, at paras. 28-32.
(3) Application of the principles
 The pith and substance analysis supports the constitutionality of s. 12(2)(f.1).