If I take the example of service to the public, the regulations will say that institutions must, where numbers warrant, provide their services in both languages. More specifically, when they communicate with the Canadian public, they will have to do so in the newspapers of the majority as well as those of the minority.
The act does not address these specific situations. It's just too specific. A regulation is created to make something more specific and definite. A regulation will say that in such and such a situation, this type of action must be taken. Regulations provide more focus to what the various institutions must do, because there are thousands of public servants who work for the federal administration.
Respecting the language of work of employees remains a general objective. The regulations will define and guide the daily work of employers so that their employees' rights are respected.
I could be even more specific. Regulations are like a recipe book or a guide book which employers and employees can refer to, to better understand their rights, to better exercise them and make sure they are respected.
As far as Bill S-3 is concerned, which is what your other question dealt with, I did not really understand what you were talking about when you referred to court action results.