DOCSLIB.ORG

Queen's Bench for Saskatchewan

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

QUEEN’S BENCH FOR SASKATCHEWAN Citation: 2017 SKQB 109 Date: 2017 04 20 Docket: QB 118 of 2005 Judicial Centre: Yorkton BETWEEN: GOOD SPIRIT SCHOOL DIVISION NO. 204 PLAINTIFF - and - CHRIST THE TEACHER ROMAN CATHOLIC SEPARATE SCHOOL DIVISION NO. 212 and THE GOVERNMENT OF SASKATCHEWAN DEFENDANTS Counsel: Robert W. Leurer, Q.C./Khurrum R. Awan and Christina M. Kerby for Good Spirit School Division No. 204 Colin K. Hirschfeld, Q.C./ Curtis J. Onishenko for Christ the Teacher Roman Catholic Separate School Division No. 212 Sharon H. Pratchler, Q.C./Theodore J.C. Litowski, Barbara C. Mysko and Thomson J. Irvine, Q.C. for the Government of Saskatchewan JUDGMENT LAYH J. APRIL 20, 2017 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. PART ONE: OVERVIEW AND STATEMENT OF ISSUES 1 I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. STATEMENT OF ISSUES 3 III. CERTAIN PRELIMINARY FINDINGS AND OBSERVIATIONS 5 IV. WITNESS SUMMARY 11 A. GSSD’s Witnesses 12 B. CTT’s Witnesses 20 C. Government Witnesses 26 V. A NECESSARY FRAMEWORK 27 A. Legislative and Constitutional Provisions 27 B. The Confederation Compromise 36 C. The Experience of the Provinces 39 PART TWO: DOES GSSD HAVE STANDING? 42 I. HISTORY OF PROCEEDINGS RESPECTING STANDING 42 II. PARTIES’ POSITIONS 44 A. GSSD’s Position 44 B. Defendants’ Position 46 III. ANALYSIS 49 A. Two Preliminary Questions 49 1. Standing on Behalf of Whom? 49 2. Can Only Beneficiaries of Separate School Rights Have Standing? 53 B. Public Interest Standing 58 1. The Direction in Eastside Sex Workers 58 2. Serious Justiciable Issue 60 3. Does GSSD Have a Real Stake or Genuine Interest? 61 4. An Effective Way to Bring the Issue Before the Court 64 ii PART THREE: IS ST. THEODORE ROMAN CATHOLIC SCHOOL A SEPARATE SCHOOL? 75 PART FOUR: IS FUNDING OF ST. THEODORE ROMAN CATHOLIC SCHOOL A PROTECTED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT UNDER SS. 93(1) AND (3) OF THE CONSTITUTION ACT, 1867? 84 I. DIVERGENT POSITIONS RESPECTING OPERATION OF SS. 93(1) AND 93(3) 84 A. Essential Elements of GSSD’S Position 84 B. Essential Elements of the Defendants’ Position 88 C. Analysis 91 1. The Legal Framework of s. 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867 91 2. Four Reasons Why the Denominational Aspects Test Applies to s. 93(3) 95 a. Does case law support applying the denominational aspects test to s. 93(3) power? 96 b. Do unreasonable results arise if the denominational aspects test is applicable to s. 93(1) but not to s. 93(3) rights? 109 c. Does Government’s reliance on s. 93(3) power give it carte blanche to avoid the Charter? 112 d. Does defendants’ evidentiary basis preclude reliance on s. 93(3)? 116 II. IS THE FUNDING OF NON-CATHOLIC STUDENTS A RIGHT FOUND UNDER THE 1901 ORDINANCES AND,IF SO, DOES THE RIGHT SATISFY THE DENOMINATIONAL ASPECTS TEST? 118 A. Section 93(1) - A Two Step Inquiry 118 B. Essential Elements of GSSD’s Position 120 1. GSSD Submits 1901Ordinances Did Not Include Right to Fund Non-Minority Faith Students 120 2. GSSD Submits Funding of Non-Minority Faith Students is Not a Denominational Right 127 C. Essential Elements of the Defendants’ Position 128 1. Defendants Submit 1901 Ordinances Include Right of Funding for Non-Minority Faith Students 128 2. Defendants Submit Funding of Non-Minority iii Faith Students Was a Denominational Right 131 D. Analysis 133 1. Conclusion: Section 93(1) Does Not Protect Funding of Non-Minority Faith Students 133 2. The Basic Premise of the 1901 Ordinances 133 3. Judicial Authority and Guiding Principles of Constitutional Interpretation 139 PART FIVE: IS FUNDING OF NON-MINORITY FAITH STUDENTS AT ST. THEODORE ROMAN CATHOLIC SCHOOL A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT UNDER S. 17(2) OF THE SASKATCHEWAN ACT? 169 I. ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE DEFENDANTS’ POSITION 169 II. ANALYSIS 171 PART SIX: DOES GOVERNMENT FUNDING VIOLATE S. 2(a) OF THE CHARTER? 176 I. ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF GSSD’S POSITION 176 II. ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF DEFENDANTS’ POSITION 178 III. ANALYSIS 179 A. Is Charter Breach Axiomatic? 179 B. Going Beyond “Axiomatic” Charter Breach: Obligation of State Neutrality 184 1. Freedom of Religion Embraces Obligation of Religious Neutrality 184 2. The Principle of Religious Neutrality 185 3. Can a Non-Individual Advance a Claim for Religious Freedom Under the Doctrine of Religious Neutrality? 196 PART SEVEN: DOES GOVERNMENT FUNDING VIOLATE S. 15 OF THE CHARTER? 203 I. POSITION OF THE PARTIES 203 II. ANALYSIS 205 A. A Preliminary Point: Section 15 Infringement Follows s. 2(a) Infringement 205 B. A Recurring Theme – Must an Individual Show Discriminatory Impact? 207 iv PART EIGHT: DOES S. 1 OF THE CHARTER JUSTIFY CHARTER VIOLATION? 215 I. BURDEN OF PROOF AND OAKES TEST 215 II. IS THERE A PRESSING OBJECTIVE TO FUND NON-CATHOLIC STUDENTS? 218 III. PROPORTIONALITY 220 IV. A POINT OF CLARIFICATION: TIME FRAME OF PRESSING OBJECTIVES 226 PART NINE: REMEDIES 228 APPENDIX 1 – The Education Act, 1995, ss. 53, 85, 87, 310 APPENDIX 2 – The Education Funding Regulations, ss. 3, 4 PART ONE: OVERVIEW AND STATEMENT OF ISSUES I. INTRODUCTION [1] In the spring of 2003 happenings in the village of Theodore, Saskatchewan would become a flashpoint, bringing to a head a vital issue in Saskatchewan education: the extent of separate school rights. That spring the community of Theodore was faced with the decision of Yorkdale School Division [Yorkdale] to close its community kindergarten to grade 8 school. Its 42 students would be bussed to the neighbouring school in Springside, 17 kilometres away on the Yellowhead Highway. After several unsuccessful efforts to keep their school open, a minority group of Roman Catholics using the provisions of The Education Act, 1995,1 successfully petitioned the Minister of Education to form Theodore Roman Catholic School Division. After protracted negotiations with Yorkdale, the newly formed school division purchased the school building and opened one school, St. Theodore Roman Catholic School. The community saved its school but prompted one of the most significant lawsuits in the province’s history. [2] St. Theodore Roman Catholic School adopted the attributes of a Catholic school and offered a program that accorded with the usual operation of a Roman Catholic separate school. When the school opened in 2003, 13 of the 42 students were Roman Catholic or 31 percent of the student enrolment. That percentage has varied since then from a high of 39 percent to a low of 23 percent. At trial, 26 students were enrolled at St. Theodore Roman Catholic School. Nine are Catholic. Dwayne Reeve, former Director of Education of Good Spirit Public School Division (the successor to Yorkdale) [GSSD] estimated that 12 to 15 elementary students from the Theodore 1 SS 1995, c E-0.2 - 2 - attendance area no longer attend St. Theodore Roman Catholic School and, instead, attend school in Springside. [3] Basic to this litigation is an understanding of the historic constitutional guarantee operative in three Canadian provinces – Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario – that entitles Roman Catholics and Protestants to petition the provincial government to create a separate denominational school if they form a minority in a school attendance area. This right is an immutably cast constitutional right under s. 93 of Constitution Act, 18672 and is unquestioned in this action. Instead, what drives this litigation is the provincial government’s policy to fund separate schools in Saskatchewan based solely on student enrolment without regard to the religious affiliation of students. As I understand GSSD’s position, it is not opposed to non-Catholic students attending St. Theodore Roman Catholic School, but submits that the historic constitutional protection of separate schools does not include the right for the school to receive government funding for non–Catholic students who attend the school. More significantly, GSSD submits that since such funding is not constitutionally guaranteed, it is exposed to scrutiny under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms3 and infringes freedom of religion under ss. 2(a) and equality rights under s. 15. [4] In essence then, this action, begun 12 years ago, poses two basic questions. First, is government funding of non-minority faith students in Saskatchewan’s separate schools a constitutionally protected component of separate schools under s. 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867? The defendants, 2 (U.K.), 30 & 31 Vict, c 3, reprinted in RSC 1985, App II No 5 3Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11. - 3 - the Government of Saskatchewan [Government] and Christ the Teacher Roman Catholic School Division [CTT], the successor to Theodore Roman Catholic School Division, submit such funding is; GSSD submits such funding is not. Second, if such funding is not constitutionally protected under s. 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867, does it infringe ss. 2(a) and 15 of the Charter? The Government and CTT submit it does not infringe the Charter; GSSD submits it does infringe the Charter. [5] In an interlocutory fiat in August 2012, Justice Mills stated that at its “simplest,” this case involves the ability of the Government to fund non- denominational students attending a denominational school. With prescient accuracy, he forewarned that “the case is much more complex than this simple statement, and if this matter were ever to proceed to trial…significant and complex issues” would have to be adjudicated. That time has now come. If funding of non-Catholic students at St. Theodore Roman Catholic School violates Charter rights, then funding of any non-Catholic students in Catholic schools in Saskatchewan similarly violates the Charter. II. STATEMENT OF ISSUES [6] Prior to the parties’ final arguments, I directed GSSD to provide to the defendants a statement of the issues the court needed to address to resolve this action.
Recommended publications
  • Brief by Professor François Larocque Research Chair In

    Brief by Professor François Larocque Research Chair In

    BRIEF BY PROFESSOR FRANÇOIS LAROCQUE RESEARCH CHAIR IN LANGUAGE RIGHTS UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA PRESENTED TO THE SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AS PART OF ITS STUDY OF THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGES REFORM PROPOSAL UNVEILED ON FEBRUARY 19, 2021, BY THE MINISTER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND OFFICIAL LANGUAGES, ENGLISH AND FRENCH: TOWARDS A SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGES IN CANADA MAY 31, 2021 Professor François Larocque Faculty of Law, Common Law Section University of Ottawa 57 Louis Pasteur Ottawa, ON K1J 6N5 Telephone: 613-562-5800, ext. 3283 Email: [email protected] 1. Thank you very much to the honourable members of the Senate Standing Committee on Official Languages (the “Committee”) for inviting me to testify and submit a brief as part of the study of the official languages reform proposal entitled French and English: Towards a Substantive Equality of Official Languages in Canada (“the reform proposal”). A) The reform proposal includes ambitious and essential measures 2. First, I would like to congratulate the Minister of Economic Development and Official Languages for her leadership and vision. It is, in my opinion, the most ambitious official languages reform proposal since the enactment of the Constitution Act, 1982 (“CA1982”)1 and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”),2 which enshrined the main provisions of the Official Languages Act (“OLA”)3 of 1969 in the Canadian Constitution. The last reform of the OLA was in 1988 and it is past time to modernize it to adapt it to Canada’s linguistic realities and challenges in the 21st century. 3. The Charter and the OLA proclaim that “English and French are the official languages of Canada and have equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all institutions of the Parliament and government of Canada.”4 In reality, however, as reported by Statistics Canada,5 English is dominant everywhere, while French is declining, including in Quebec.
  • Jurisdictional Dilemmas in Resource Industries I

    Jurisdictional Dilemmas in Resource Industries I

    1979) JURISDICTIONALDILEMMAS 91 JURISDICTIONALDILEMMAS IN RESOURCEINDUSTRIES WILLIAM M. ELLIOTT• This paper highlights constitutional dilemmas posed by the Canadian constitution in matters of resource regulation., marketing and taxation., with particular em­ phasis on Saskatchewan. The background to and impact of the CIGOL case is examined, including a discussion of the issues of direct tazation and the trade and commerce power. Ancillary matters such as recovery of payments under invalid laws and techniques of interim relief also receive scndiny. Similar problems in the potash and uranium industries are analyzed. I. INTRODUCTION The dilemmas posed by constitutional limitations on the powers of provincial governments and the federal government are not confined to oil and gas, but include all resources. Oil and gas are merely part of a larger question. Furthermore, the problems vary from region to region and province to province, and the approaches and solutions vary with the political philosophy of governments of the day. The struggle is not new and will not go away even in the event of constitutional change. Corporations, whether private or publicly owned, will always be faced with the discipline of the bottom line and governments with the real or fancied "need" of politicians and tax gatherers. The words "fair", "reasonable," "just' and "unconstitu­ tional" will continue to be heard. One should not expect any so-called solutions to be more than a te.mporary lull before another storm. In a huge country divided by regions, and governed by a federal system with divided constitutional powers, the possibilities of disagreement are endless. II. HISTORY Sections 91 and 92 of the British North America Act 1 give rise to most of the jurisdictional questions.
  • 1St Session 19Th Legislature

    1St Session 19Th Legislature

    JOURNALS of the LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY of the Province of Saskatchewan From the 22nd day of February. 1979 to the 3rd day of May. 1979 In the Twenty-eighth Year of the Reign of Our Sovereign Lady, Queen Elizabeth II BEING THE FIRST SESSION OF THE NINETEENTH LEGISLATURE OF THE PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN Session, 1979 REGINA: R. S. REID. QUEEN'S PRINTER 1979 VOLUME LXXXV CONTENTS Session, 1979 JOURNALS of the Legislative Assembly of Saskatchewan including QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Pages 1 to 197 JOURNALS of the Leg1slat1ve Assembly of Saskatchewan Pages 1 to 194 QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Appendix Pages 195 to 197 MEETING OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY CAMERON IRWIN MclNTOSH. Lieutenant Governor, (L.S.) CANADA PROVINCE OF SASKATCHEWAN ELIZABETHTHE SECOND. by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom. Canada and Her other Realms and Territories QUEEN. Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith. TO OUR FAITHFUL the MEMBERS elected to serve in the Legislative Assembly of Our Province of Saskatchewan. and to every one of you. GREETING: A PROCLAMATION DR. R. GOSSE. WHEREAS. it is expedient for causes Deputy and considerations to convene the Attorney General Legislative Assembly of Our Prov- ince of Saskatchewan. WE DO WILL that you and each of you and all others in this behalf interested on THURSDAY. the TWENTY-SECOND day of FEBRUARY. 1979, at Our City of Regina. personally be and appear for the despatch of Business. there to take into consideration the state and welfare of Our said Province of Saskatchewan and thereby do as may seem necessary. HEREIN FAIL NOT. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF we have caused Our Letters to be made Patent and the Great Seal of Our said Province of Saskatchewan to be hereunto affixed.
  • Was Duplessis Right? Roderick A

    Was Duplessis Right? Roderick A

    Document generated on 09/27/2021 4:21 p.m. McGill Law Journal Revue de droit de McGill Was Duplessis Right? Roderick A. Macdonald The Legacy of Roncarelli v. Duplessis, 1959-2009 Article abstract L’héritage de l’affaire Roncarelli c. Duplessis, 1959-2009 Given the inclination of legal scholars to progressively displace the meaning of Volume 55, Number 3, September 2010 a judicial decision from its context toward abstract propositions, it is no surprise that at its fiftieth anniversary, Roncarelli v. Duplessis has come to be URI: https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1000618ar interpreted in Manichean terms. The complex currents of postwar society and DOI: https://doi.org/10.7202/1000618ar politics in Quebec are reduced to a simple story of good and evil in which evil is incarnated in Duplessis’s “persecution” of Roncarelli. See table of contents In this paper the author argues for a more nuanced interpretation of the case. He suggests that the thirteen opinions delivered at trial and on appeal reflect several debates about society, the state and law that are as important now as half a century ago. The personal socio-demography of the judges authoring Publisher(s) these opinions may have predisposed them to decide one way or the other; McGill Law Journal / Revue de droit de McGill however, the majority and dissenting opinions also diverged (even if unconsciously) in their philosophical leanings in relation to social theory ISSN (internormative pluralism), political theory (communitarianism), and legal theory (pragmatic instrumentalism). Today, these dimensions can be seen to 0024-9041 (print) provide support for each of the positions argued by Duplessis’s counsel in 1920-6356 (digital) Roncarelli given the state of the law in 1946.
  • Treaty Implementation: Fulfilling the Covenant

    Treaty Implementation: Fulfilling the Covenant

    TREATY IMPLEMENTATION: FULFILLING THE COVENANT Office of the Treaty Commissioner Saskatoon, Saskatchewan © Office of the Treaty Commissioner 2007. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior written permission of the Office of the Treaty Commissioner. ISBN 978 – 0 – 9782685 – 0 – 3 Printed in Canada Published by the Office of the Treaty Commissioner Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada Publication of this book has been made possible with the cooperation of the Saskatchewan Institute of Public Policy Treaty Implementation: Fulfilling the Covenant Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL . vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . xii SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS . xix 1. INTRODUCTION . 1 The Exploratory Treaty Table . 3 Two Perspectives on the Treaties . 4 The Statement of Treaty Issues . 5 The “Made in Saskatchewan” Process . 7 The Governance Agreements in Principle . 8 About This Report . 9 2. THE INTENTIONS OF THE TREATY PARTIES . 15 Spirit and Intent of Treaties: The Elders’ Understanding . 15 a) Elders’ Understanding of Treaty Principles . 17 b) Wîtaskêwin – Living Together on the Land . 18 c) Elements of Treaty that Require Flexibility and Adaptability . 20 The Numbered Treaties: Canada’s Understandings . 21 a) The Policy of the Royal Proclamation of 1763 . 22 b) Legislative Policies and the Indian Act . 24 c) Treaties in the Modern Era . 26 Conclusion: Identifying Common Intentions as a Guide to the Future . 27 3. APPROACHES AT THE EXPLORATORY TREATY TABLE . 29 Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations Approach . 30 Canada’s Approach . 31 Common Understandings .
  • The Honourable Justice Louis Lebel**

    The Honourable Justice Louis Lebel**

    A COMMON LAW OF THE WORLD? THE RECEPTION OF CUSTOMARY INTERNATIONAL LAW IN THE CANADIAN COMMON LAW* The Honourable Justice Louis LeBel** INTRODUCTION In an increasingly globalized world, the importance of international law to our domestic legal system continues to grow. This growth is both exponential and multi- dimensional. International law had been traditionally concerned with relations between states and about the status and action of international organizations. But today, not only is international law having a greater impact than ever on the state of domestic law, it also influences more areas of domestic law than ever. These areas include human rights, labour law, commercial law, intellectual property law, immigration and refugee law, and criminal law, to name but a few. In this paper, I intend to focus on the means by which customary international law exerts its influence on the Canadian domestic legal culture. As will be discussed in greater detail below, customary international law is developed by state practice and the recognition of the legally binding nature of this practice, while other parts of international law are grounded in treaties and other multilateral instruments, which reflect the contractual activities of states and organizations. I will address some intricacies of this process. Before I do so, however, I will use again an analogy which, at least for the classical music lovers, may be of some assistance to understand the issues of interaction of international and domestic law. A number of years ago, I co-wrote an article describing how the reception of international law into the Canadian legal order could be usefully compared to two distinct classical musical styles.
  • 71 History of Factums Je Côté* I

    71 History of Factums Je Côté* I

    HISTORY OF FACTUMS 71 HISTORY OF FACTUMS J.E. CÔTÉ* The history of the factum in Canada is little known Bien que l’histoire du mémoire au Canada soit peu but greatly significant in the development of written connue, elle a contribué de façon importante à argument. Written argument grew alongside the oral l’avènement de l’argumentation écrite, qui évolué en legal tradition. The factum developed in Canada in an parallèle avec la tradition de l’exposé oral. Le unorthodox way. Unlike most Canadian laws and mémoire s’est implanté au Canada selon une voie peu procedures, which find their roots in common law orthodoxe. Contrairement à la plupart des lois et England, the factum originated in Quebec’s civil procédures canadiennes qui prennent leur fondement jurisdiction before being adopted in the Northwest dans la common law de l’Angleterre, le mémoire a pris Territories. This article explores the evolution of son origine dans le système de droit civil du Québec written argument and the historical use of the factum avant d’être adopté dans les Territoires du Nord- in the United Kingdom and Canada and details the Ouest. Outre un survol de l’évolution de practice of factum use in Alberta particularly. l’argumentation écrite et de la façon dont on a eu recours au mémoire au Royaume-Uni et au Canada par le passé, l’article expose en détail l’utilisation du mémoire en Alberta. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 71 II. EVOLUTION ................................................ 72 A. THE UNITED KINGDOM ................................... 72 B. QUEBEC ............................................... 74 C. THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA .........................
  • Procedural Fairness and the Drafting of Reasons

    Procedural Fairness and the Drafting of Reasons

    Procedural Fairness and the Drafting of Reasons 17th Advanced Administrative Law & Practice The Canadian Institute October 24 - 25, 2017 Ottawa, Ontario Graham J. Clarke Arbitrator/Mediator 2 Procedural Fairness and the Drafting of Reasons TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3 Recent Procedural Fairness Cases ............................................................................................ 4 Bias: Appearances Matter ...................................................................................................... 4 Evidence ................................................................................................................................ 5 Raising and deciding novel issues during the drafting process ............................................... 7 Quorum Matters: how much assistance can a decision maker receive? ................................. 8 A conclusion is not a decision ................................................................................................11 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................13 17th Advanced Administrative Law and Practice Graham J. Clarke The Canadian Institute Arbitrator/Mediator October 24-25, 2017 Ottawa, Ontario 3 Procedural Fairness and the Drafting of Reasons INTRODUCTION1 A client asked his new lawyer to guess why he had chosen to send him
  • 209 AMENDING the BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT. Every

    209 AMENDING the BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT. Every

    209 AMENDING THE BRITISH NORTH AMERICA ACT. Every Canadian should be inspired by the vision of the Fathers of Confederation in their conception of one vast nation of the British Provinces in North America, stretching from sea to sea, and by the ability and courage they displayed in putting their patriotic vision into practical effect. But the B .N.A. Act makes no special provision for its amendment and the suggestion is sometimes made that this point was overlooked. I believe the Fathers of Confederation assumed that any amendments to the Act would, as the occasion arose, be made by the Imperial Parliament . I can find no reference in pre-Confederation speeches to the amendment of the proposed Act, except that in the debates of the Canadian Parliament of 1865 the Hon . D'Arcy McGee said :- "We go to the Imperial Government, the common arbiter of us all, in our true Federal metropolis-we go there to ask for our fundamental Charter. We hope, by having that Charter can that only be amended by the authority that made it, that we will lay the basis of permanency for our future government." -"Canada Confederation Debates", (1865) page 146. There is a very substantial part of the Canadian Constitution outside the B.N.A. Act, which, following British precedent, grows. and develops. The B .N.A. Act, however, can only be amended by statute and, defining as it does the legislative power of the Dominion and provinces respectively, the question as to how it should be amended has of late years become a matter of increasing importance .
  • A Gentle Reminder That Traditional Class Action Principles Are Not Passé?

    A Gentle Reminder That Traditional Class Action Principles Are Not Passé?

    A Gentle Reminder that Traditional Class Action Principles are not Passé? Christine Carron Senior Partner, Ogilvy Renault INTRODUCTION The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Bisaillon v. Concordia University will certainly spark a plethora of commentary from labour law specialists. In a narrow decision (four to three, Justices McLachlin, Bastarache and Binnie dissenting), the Supreme Court held that disputes arising over funding of the University’s pension plan were subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of a labour arbitrator and could not be resolved by way of a class action proceeding before the Quebec Superior Court. It is significant that there was no disagreement among the justices as to the principles that govern class action proceedings, collective agreements and the jurisdiction of arbitrators under those agreements. The justices were divided only with respect to the application of those principles to the specific facts of the case. We will leave it to others specializing in labour law to opine on whether the application of those principles to the facts at issue in the case will stand the test of time. Instead, this paper will focus on some of the principles applicable to class actions that were clearly enunciated and over which there was no disagreement. The reason is two-fold. First, these principles transcend the arena of labour law and have far-reaching implications for class actions generally. Second, their enunciation is all the more important given the paucity of judgments from the Supreme Court in Quebec class action proceedings. This paucity is due largely to the fact that judgments authorizing class actions may not be appealed in Quebec and many defendants prefer to settle when a class action is certified1 rather than risk an adverse judgment on the merits.
  • Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: Does It Apply to Finding the Law As Well As

    Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: Does It Apply to Finding the Law As Well As

    Beyond a Reasonable Doubt:Does it Apply to Finding the Law asWell as the Facts? Martin Friedland* 1. Introduction About a year ago I published an article in the Criminal Law Quarterly in which I examined the concept of proof beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal trials.1 I looked at its application to the proof of facts, historically, comparatively, and analytically. The standard of proof of facts Ð everyone agrees Ð plays a crucial role in the criminal process. What role does reasonable doubt play with respect to determining the criminal law, particularly the scope of statutory provisions? I had nevergivenseriousthoughttotheissue.Iknew,ofcourse,thatthereis a rule of strict construction of criminal legislation Ð known in the United States as the Rule of Lenity Ð and assumed that the rule only applies if there is a tie, which is really a balance of probability test. In other words, the better argument wins, with the ultimate burden being on the Crown.2 Many, if not most, readers probably assume this is the correct approach. The standard for finding the criminal law, like the standard of proof of facts, is important, yet surprisingly little has been written aboutit inCanada,3 unlikeinthe UnitedStates,wherethereare many major articles.4 There are, of course, relatively brief discussions in * Martin Friedland, CC, QC, University Professor and Professor of Law Emeritus, University of Toronto. I would like to thank Pavle Levkovic and Michael Stenbring for their excellent research assistance. I am also grateful to Ben Berger, Michael Code, Timothy Endicott, Matthew Gourlay, Kent Roach, Bob Sharpe, Simon Stern, Malcolm Thorburn, and Wes Wilson for their helpful comments on earlier drafts.
  • Indian Reserves on the Prairies 243

    Indian Reserves on the Prairies 243

    1985] INDIAN RESERVES ON THE PRAIRIES 243 INDIAN RESERVES ON THE PRAIRIES RICHARD H. BARTLETT~ Indian reserves comprise the only land left to the Indians of the Prairie Provinces. This paper endeavors to examine and explain the rights of ownership and administra­ tion held by the Indians and Governments in such lands. It endeavors to determine what the treaties between the Indians and the Crown promised and to what extent they have been fulfilled. Rights with respect to minerals and timber are examined in the course of the study. I. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF INDIANS RESERVES BY TREATY 1 Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan make up the Prairie Provinces of Canada. The southern reaches of the Provinces were the traditional lands of the plains' tribes: the Plains Cree, the Assiniboine, the Gros Ventre, the Blackfoot and the Sarcee. 2 To the north the forests were the territory of the Chipewyan, Beaver, Slave and Sekani tribes. 3 The traditional title of the Indians to their lands was recognized in the terms of the treaties that were entered into between the Crown in the right of the Dominion and the Indians. The treaties provided for the surrender of the Indian title in return for the establishment of reserves, guarantees as to hunting and fishing rights, annuities and certain social and economic undertakings. The treaties were entered into as the pressure of settlement and development demanded. Indian title in southern Manitoba and Saskat­ chewan was surrendered by Treaties #1 (1871), #2 (1871), #3 (1873) and #4 (1874). Central Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta was surrendered by Treaties #5 (1875) and #6 (1876).