Terri-Jean Bedford, left, and Valerie Scott, shown in 2009, along with a third woman, launched a constitutional challenge of Canada's anti-prostitution laws. (Michael Turshic/CBC)

The Ontario Court of Appeal has ruled that Canada's prostitution laws will stay in place for at least several more months, pending an appeal of a landmark ruling.

The court ruling on Thursday means that three laws — communicating for the purpose of prostitution, keeping a common bawdy house and living off the avails of prostitution — will continue to be valid.

The decision extends the stay until April 29, putting pressure on the government to expedite the appeal.

Lawyer Alan Young, who represented the sex trade workers who fought the laws, said outside the court on Thursday that the appeal "must be heard before April 29."

"This is simply an interim measure," he said, because there has never been a situation in Canada where there has been a "complete regulatory void in terms of the sex trade."

Young said that as far as he was concerned the April 29 limit was unnecessary.

"We are ready to argue this tomorrow," he said.

"I do believe when the dust settles [the lower court] decision will be upheld both by the Ontario Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada," said Young.

Justice Marc Rosenberg, in his ruling, said it would be harmful to the public interest to have the lower court ruling come into effect immediately.

Federal Justice Minister Ron Nicholson said in Ottawa that he believes the laws are constitutional and that "the provisions denounce and deter the most harmful and public aspects of prostitution."

Nicholson said he expects the appeal will be heard before April 29.

Lawyers for the province and the federal government asked for the stay, saying that without it Canada would be plunged into an unprecedented social experiment because Parliament didn't have time to craft alternative legislation.

Earlier in 2010, an Ontario Superior Court judge struck down the three laws.

Justice Susan Himel ruled the laws were unconstitutional because they prevented sex trade workers from protecting themselves by doing business in their homes.

Himel said in her ruling that the current laws "contribute to the danger faced by prostitutes."

Dominatrix Terri-Jean Bedford, Valerie Scott and Amy Lebovitch had argued that the three laws forced them from the safety of their homes to face violence on the streets.

The women asked the court to declare legal restrictions on their activities a violation of charter rights of security of the person and freedom of expression.

Young said the laws as they stand right now mean "bad laws will continue to be under-enforced" and they need to be taken off the books right away.

With files from The Canadian Press