Charlebois v. Saint John (City), 2004 NBCA 49

• Judge: Daigle, Larlee and Deschênes, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (New Brunswick)
• Case Date: June 17, 2004
• Jurisdiction: New Brunswick
• Citations: 2004 NBCA 49;(2004), 275 N.B.R.(2d) 203 (CA)

Charlebois v. Saint John (2004), 275 N.B.R.(2d) 203 (CA);

    275 R.N.-B.(2e) 203; 722 A.P.R. 203

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: [2004] N.B.R.(2d) TBEd. JN.033

Mario Charlebois (applicant/appellant) v. The City of Saint John (respondent/respondent) and Attorney General of New Brunswick, Union of Municipalities of New Brunswick and Cities of New Brunswick Association (interveners/interveners) and Association des juristes d'expression française du Nouveau-Brunswick (amicus curiae)

(166/02/CA; 2004 NBCA 49)

Indexed As: Charlebois v. Saint John (City)

New Brunswick Court of Appeal

Daigle, Larlee and Deschênes, JJ.A.

June 17, 2004.

Summary:

Charlebois filed a Notice of Motion drafted in French, seeking an order compelling the City of Saint John to offer its services equal­ly in both official languages. The City re­plied with a motion to strike. The City drafted its court processes, pleadings and affidavits in English. The Attorney General intervened. The Attorney General filed court processes in French and quoted legal deci­sions and other documents in English, with­out translation. Charlebois protested the use of the English language by the City in its processes, pleadings and affidavits, and by the Attorney General in his references.

The New Brunswick Court of Queen's Bench, Trial Division, in a decision reported at 255 N.B.R.(2d) 396; 668 A.P.R. 396, held that the City was entitled to use the English language in its court processes, pleadings and affidavits, and that the Attorney General was entitled to use references in the English language. The court postponed the hearing of Charlebois's original application to a later date. Charlebois appealed.

The New Brunswick Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 2706

Language - General principles - Institution of the legislature and government of New Brunswick - Section 22 of the Official Languages Act, S.N.B. 2002, c. O-0.5, stipulated: "Where Her Majesty in right of the Province or an institution is a party to civil proceedings before a court, Her Maj­esty or the institution concerned shall use, in any oral or written pleadings or any process issuing from a court, the official language chosen by the other party" - Was a municipality an "institution" within the meaning of this section? - The New Bruns­wick Court of Appeal interpreted section 22 - The court applied the "modern" ap­proach to statutory interpretation, applied the presumption of coherence of statutes, took into account the quasi-constitutional status of the Act and held that New Bruns­wick municipalities were not institutions within the meaning of this section - Conse­quently, in this case, the respondent City of Saint John did not have to use, in its oral or written pleadings and processes, the official language chosen by the applicant, in this case, French - The court added that since the interpreted provision was unam­biguous, there was no need to resort to the Charter to elicit legislative intent - See paragraphs 1 to 58.

Civil Rights - Topic 2723

Language - Court proceedings and pro­cesses - Choice of language by party - [See Civil Rights - Topic 2706 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 2723

Language - Court proceedings and pro­cesses - Choice of language by party - Section 22 of the Official Languages Act, S.N.B. 2002, c. O-0.5, stipulated: "Where Her Majesty in right of the Province or an institution is a party to civil proceedings before a court, Her Majesty or the institu­tion concerned shall use, in any oral or written pleadings or any process issuing from a court, the official language chosen by the other party" - The Attorney General of New Brunswick intervened by Notice of Motion in a proceeding instituted in French by Charlebois against a municipality - The Notice of Motion was in French as well as the affidavit attached to the Notice of Motion - The affidavit sought to adduce in evidence a document drafted in English - In his pre-trial brief or book of authorities, the Attorney General quoted several cases in English without providing a translation - Should the proposed evidence and legal authorities be provided in French? - The New Brunswick Court of Appeal answered no - The words "pleadings" and "pro­cesses" did not include evidence and legal authorities - See paragraphs 59 to 63.

Statutes - Topic 501

Interpretation - General principles - Pur­pose of legislation - Duty to promote object of statute - [See Civil Rights - Topic 2706 ].

Statutes - Topic 504

Interpretation - General principles - Quasi-constitutional statutes (e.g., language legis­lation) - [See Civil Rights - Topic 2706 ].

Statutes - Topic 1411

Interpretation - Construction where mean­ing is not plain - General principles - Avoidance of conflict with Charter - [See Civil Rights - Topic 2706 ].

Statutes - Topic 2603

Interpretation - Interpretation of words and phrases - Interpretation by context (incl. "modern rule") - Intention from whole of section or statute - [See Civil Rights - Topic 2706 ].

Statutes - Topic 2617

Interpretation - Interpretation of words and phrases - Interpretation by context (incl. "modern rule") - Harmonization of statutes - [See Civil Rights - Topic 2706 ].

Cases Noticed:

Rizzo & Rizzo Shoes Ltd. (Bankrupt), Re, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 27; 221 N.R. 241; 106 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 19].

CanadianOxy Chemicals Ltd. et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [1999] 1 S.C.R. 743; 237 N.R. 373; 122 B.C.A.C. 1; 200 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Ulybel Enterprises Ltd., [2001] 2 S.C.R. 867; 275 N.R. 201; 206 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 304; 618 A.P.R. 304, refd to. [para. 19].

Chieu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2002] 1 S.C.R. 84; 280 N.R. 268, refd to. [para. 19].

Bell ExpressVu Limited Partnership v. Rex et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 559; 287 N.R. 248; 166 B.C.A.C. 1; 271 W.A.C. 1, consd. [para. 19].

Charlebois v. Moncton (City) (2001), 242 N.B.R.(2d) 259; 628 A.P.R. 259 (C.A.), consd. [para. 26].

Godbout v. Longueuil (Ville), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 844; 219 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 26].

Nanaimo (City) v. Rascal Trucking Ltd. et al., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 342; 251 N.R. 42; 132 B.C.A.C. 298; 215 W.A.C. 298, refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Gautreau (1989), 101 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 254 A.P.R. 1 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Haché (E.) (1993), 139 N.B.R.(2d) 81; 357 A.P.R. 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 26].

Lavigne v. Commissioner of Official Lan­guages (Can.) et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 773; 289 N.R. 282, consd. [para. 33].

R. v. Beaulac (J.V.), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 768; 238 N.R. 131; 121 B.C.A.C. 227; 198 W.A.C. 227, refd to. [para. 36].

Arsenault-Cameron et al. v. Prince Edward Island, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 3; 249 N.R. 140; 184 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 44; 599 A.P.R. 44, refd to. [para. 36].

Murphy v. Welsh, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 1069; 156 N.R. 263; 65 O.A.C. 103, refd to. [para. 44].

Stoddard v. Watson - see Murphy v. Welsh.

Pointe-Claire (Ville) v. Syndicat des em­ployées et employés professionnels-les et de bureau, section locale 57 (S.E.P.B. - U.I.E.P.B. - C.T.C. - F.T.Q.), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 1015; 211 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 44].

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335, refd to. [para. 52].

Gosselin v. Quebec (Procureur général), [2002] 4 S.C.R. 429; 298 N.R. 1, refd to. [para. 57].

Lavigne v. Canada (Minister of Human Resources Development) et al. (1995), 96 F.T.R. 68 (T.D.), consd. [para. 61].

Tolofson v. Jensen and Tolofson, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1022; 175 N.R. 161; 77 O.A.C. 81; 51 B.C.A.C. 241; 84 W.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 63].

Statutes Noticed:

Official Languages Act, S.N.B. 2002, c. O-0.5, sect. 1, sect. 22 [para. 14].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Driedger, Elmer A., Construction of Stat­utes (2nd Ed. 1983), p. 87 [para. 18].

Driedger, Elmer A., Construction of Stat­utes (3rd Ed. 1994), p. 176 [para. 43].

Counsel:

Mario Charlebois, for the appellant, ap­peared in person;

Mélanie Tompkins, for the respondent;

Gaétan Migneault and Chantal M. Cormier, for the intervener, Attorney General of New Brunswick;

J.C. Marc Richard, Q.C., and Chantal A. Thibodeau, for the interveners, Union of Municipalities of New Brunswick and Cities of New Brunswick Association;

Michel Doucet and Bruno G. Roy, for the Amicus Curiae, Association des juristes d'expression française du Nouveau-Brunswick.

This appeal was heard on October 15, 2003, by Daigle, Larlee and Deschênes, JJ.A., of the New Brunswick Court of Ap­peal.

The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered in both official languages on June 17, 2004, by Daigle, J.A.