Baier et al. v. Alberta, (2006) 351 N.R. 302 (SCC)

• Judge: Rothstein, J.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: July 07, 2006
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (2006), 351 N.R. 302 (SCC);2006 SCC 38;[2006] SCJ No 38 (QL);269 DLR (4th) 233;351 NR 302;61 Alta LR (4th) 62;[2006] 2 SCR 311;377 WAC 287;391 AR 287

Baier v. Alta. (2006), 351 N.R. 302 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Temp. Cite: [2006] N.R. TBEd. AU.006

Ronald David Baier, George Ollenberger, Liam McNiff, Evelyn Alexandra Keith and The Alberta Teachers' Association v. Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Alberta

(31526; 2006 SCC 38; 2006 CSC 38)

Indexed As: Baier et al. v. Alberta

Supreme Court of Canada

Rothstein, J.

July 7, 2006.

Summary:

The applicants challenged the constitu­tionality of amendments to the Local Author­ities Election Act (LAEA amendments) which precluded all employees employed by school districts and divisions, charter schools and private schools from seeking nomination as school trustees anywhere in Alberta unless they took an unpaid leave of absence from their employment, and then resigned if elected. The applicants argued that the LAEA amendments breached their ss. 2(b), 2(d) and 15(1) Charter rights.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at 369 A.R. 159; 2004 ABQB 669, allowed the application. The LAEA amendments infringed the applicants' s. 2(b) Charter rights and were not saved by s. 1. The court made no finding with respect to s. 15(1). Alberta appealed the s. 2(b) finding but not the s. 1 finding. The appli­cants cross-appealed, alleging an infringe­ment of s. 15(1).

The Alberta Court of Appeal, in a decision reported at 384 A.R. 237; 367 W.A.C. 237; 2006 ABCA 137, allowed the appeal and dis­missed the cross-appeal. The applicants applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. They applied for a stay of the judgment pending the appeal.

The Alberta Court of Appeal, per Côté and Costigan, JJ.A., in a decision reported at [2006] A.R. Uned. 91; 2006 ABCA 187, dis­missed the application. The applicants ap­plied to the Supreme Court of Canada for a stay of the judgment of the Court of Appeal.

The Supreme Court of Canada, per Roth­stein, J., allowed the application. The court exempted school board employees who were presently sitting as school board trustees as a result of a valid election from the oper­ation of the legislation. The stay would con­tinue until leave to appeal was denied or if leave was granted only to the earlier of the court's decision on appeal or the expiry of the current terms of the affected school board employees.

Practice - Topic 5854

Judgments and orders - Enforcement of judg­ments - Stay of - The applicants chal­lenged the constitutionality of amendments to the Local Authorities Election Act (LAEA amendments) which precluded all em­ployees employed by school districts and divisions, charter schools and private schools from seeking nomination as school trustees anywhere in Alberta unless they took an unpaid leave of absence from their employment, and then resigned if elected - The applications judge allowed the applica­tion - Some of the applicants were elected to positions of school trustees - The Al­berta Court of Appeal allowed an appeal - The applicants applied for leave to appeal and for a stay of execution - The Supreme Court of Canada, per Rothstein, J., stayed the execution of the judgment - The effect of the judgment of the Court of Appeal was to disqualify those school board em­ployees from carrying out their terms as sitting school trustees - The enforcement of the effect of the judgment could be stayed - There was a serious issue and irreparable harm and the balance of convenience fa­voured the applicants - The court exempted school board employees who were present­ly sitting as school board trustees as a result of a valid election from the opera­tion of the legislation.

Practice - Topic 8881

Appeals - Leave to appeal - Stay of pro­ceedings pending - [See Practice - Topic 5854 ].

Practice - Topic 8951

Appeals - Stay of proceedings pending appeal - Jurisdiction - [See Practice - Topic 5854 ].

Practice - Topic 8959

Appeals - Stay of proceedings pending appeal - Considerations - [See Practice - Topic 5854 ].

Practice - Topic 9096

Appeals - Supreme Court of Canada - Stay of proceedings pending appeal - [See Prac­tice - Topic 5854 ].

Practice - Topic 9264

Appeals - Judgments by appeal court - Stay of - [See Practice - Topic 5854 ].

Cases Noticed:

RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311; 164 N.R. 1; 60 Q.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 13].

Statutes Noticed:

Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada, SOR/2002-156, rule 62 [para. 12].

Supreme Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. S-26, sect. 65.1(1) [para. 12].

Counsel:

None disclosed.

Solicitors of Record:

None disclosed.

This application was heard and decided on July 7, 2006, by Rothstein, J., of the Su­preme Court of Canada, by way of a confer­ence call. The following written judg­ment was delivered on July 10, 2006, and revised on July 27, 2006.