In the US, you have the legal concept of an adhesion contract - one in which one party has no power to negotiate the terms. In a situation where the government has given exclusive licenses to portions of the EM spectrum to carriers and subscribers have no power to negotiate the terms of the contract, it would be deemed an adhesion contract.
Adhesion contracts are treated very differently under the law in the US than those that are negotiated at arm's length. Courts can rewrite adhesion contracts in ways they can't if both parties are considered close equals in terms of bargaining power. Hence the lawsuits if Verizon would try to eliminate unlimited data on contract even if the contract says they could, and this is why Verizon isn't doing it (not because they are good guys).
I am ignorant of Canadian law other than to know Canadian law shares the same common law ancestry as 49 of the US states, in that it is derived from English common law. But the US has diverged so much from the English common law at this point, I am sure that there are significant differences between US and Canadian law, too.
I did quickly research whether Canada has contingency fee attorneys and you do, but they are far more restricted than in the US, notably, in some provinces (maybe in all?) they have to have their fees approved by a court and must charge hourly rates if they lose. Very, very different than the US.