LANG Committee Report

Table 19: Cases pertaining to language rights

Case

Description

Mahé v. Alberta (School governance)

In Mahé v. Alberta the Supreme Court of Canada recognized the rights of parents belonging to an official language minority group to govern minority language education facilities.

Susan Abbey v.Essex
County Board of Education

(Access to education)

An English-speaking couple, Susan Abbey and her husband, registered their three children in a French-language school. When the family moved to another community, Ms. Abbey registered her children in an immersion school, but she quickly realized that the immersion program did not meet her children's educational needs. The English- language school board turned down her request to register her children in a French- language school and pay the tuition fees.

The Ontario Divisional Court rejected the applicant's arguments. The Court of Appeal of Ontario decided in Susan Abbey's favour. It ruled that all Ms. Abbey's children were accorded rights under section 23, even if their parents were not French-speaking, given that the eldest had been educated in a minority French-language school..

Commission of Official Languages v. Her Majesty the Queen

(Delegation of powers and language rights)

The CCP granted funding to the Association des juristes d'expression française de l'Ontario (AJEFO) so it could intervene in a court challenge calling into question the Federal Contraventions Act and the issue of delegation of powers. AJEFO was concerned that, in the Act, the federal government had failed to confirm the protection of acquired language rights provided for in federal law, and more particularly Bill 108 (Streamlining of Administration of Provincial Offences Act, 1998).La Cour fédérale a tranché en faveur de l'AJEFO.

The Federal Court ruled in favour of AJEFO.

Fédération franco-ténoise v. Canada (Territorial governments' linguistic obligations)

The CCP granted funding to the Fédération franco-ténoise for a court challenge to clarify whether the government of the Northwest Territories and, by extension, all territorial governments, were institutions of the Government of Canada in the application of section 20 of the Charter and of language rights in the area of services.

According to Justice Rouleau, the Northwest Territories were part of the federal Crown and were therefore subject to the linguistic obligations set out in the Charter. The Northwest Territories launched an appeal of this ruling before the Federal Court of Appeal, which upheld the appeal.

Chiasson et al. v. The Attorney General of Québec

(Language rights and freedom of expression)

The CCP granted funding for a court challenge involving Québec's Charter of the French Language, section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the language of software in the workplace.

Justice Pierre J. Dalphond of the Québec Superior Court, District of Montréal, declared that the Charter of the French Language did not allow the Office de la langue françaiseto prevent an employer from providing English-language programs in a workplace where French-language programs were already available to employees.

Charlebois v. City of Moncton

(Legislative bilingualism)

A City of Moncton building inspector issued Mr. Charlebois, a French-speaking resident of Moncton, an order that was written in English only. Mr. Charlebois challenged the constitutional validity of the order, as well as that of the by-law under which the order was issued, since the by-law was not adopted in both of New Brunswick's official languages.The Société des acadiens et acadiennes du Nouveau- Brunswick and the Association des juristes d'expression française du Nouveau- Brunswick intervened in Mr. Charlebois' favour.

The trial court judge dismissed Mr. Charlebois' motion and stated that the City of Moncton had no constitutional obligation to adopt its by-laws in both official languages and that the fact that its by-laws were adopted in one or the other, but not both, official languages could not serve as a basis for having them declared null and void. The New Brunswick Court of Appeal reversed this decision in favour of Mr. Charlebois.

Lalonde v. Health Services Restructuring Commission of Ontario

Unwritten principle of protection for minorities

In this case, the applicants were contesting the Ontario government's decision to close the only fully francophone hospital in the Ottawa region, the Montfort Hospital. The CCP granted the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadiennes du Canada, the Association canadienne-française de l'Ontario, and the Association canadienne-française de l'Ontario (Toronto) funding to intervene in favour of the applicants before the Ontario Court of Appeal.

The Court rejected the appeal from the Ontario government and maintained the Divisional Court's decision stating that the closure of the hospital violated the unwritten principle of protection for minorites.

Arsenault-Cameron v. Prince Edward Island

French-speaking parents in Summerside, Prince Edward Island, and the organization representing them - the Fédération des parents francophones de l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard - had for several years been demanding that a French-language school be set up in their community. In January of 1997, the Prince Edward Island Supreme Court sided with the parents, saying they had a right to a French-language school. The government appealed the decision and won.

In 1998, the Fédération des parents de l’Île-du-Prince-Édouard were granted Program funding to take the case before the Supreme Court of Canada. Funding was also granted to Prince Edward Island’s French Language Board, the Société Saint-Thomas d’Aquin and the Commission nationale des parents francophones to intervene on behalf of the parents.

The Supreme Court’s decision of January 2000 quashed the decision of the Prince Edward Island Supreme Court, Appeal Division.

Sources: CCP Annual Reports, http://www.ccppcj.ca/e/resources/resources.shtml