Conseil scolaire fransaskois et al. v. Saskatchewan, (2011) 378 Sask.R. 1 (QB)

• Judge: Chicoine, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: May 30, 2011
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (2011), 378 Sask.R. 1 (QB);2011 SKQB 210

Conseil scolaire fransaskois v. Sask. (2011), 378 Sask.R. 1 (QB)

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: [2011] Sask.R. TBEd. JL.036

Conseil scolaire fransaskois, l'Association des parents fransaskois Inc., Yvan Lebel, Élizabeth Perreault (plaintiffs/applicants) v. The Government of Saskatchewan (defendant/respondent)

(2011 QBG No. 820; 2011 SKQB 210)

Indexed As: Conseil scolaire fransaskois et al. v. Saskatchewan

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Regina

Chicoine, J.

May 30, 2011.

Summary:

The plaintiffs brought an action against the government of Saskatchewan for declaratory orders and permanent injunctive relief requiring Saskatchewan to provide sufficient funding for the minority language school system (CSF). They claimed that the CSF had been chronically underfunded prohibiting it from fulfilling its constitutional mandate under s. 23 of the Charter. The plaintiffs applied for an interlocutory mandatory injunction ordering Saskatchewan to immediately provide extra funding to the CSF to meet an anticipated 2.3 million dollar shortfall in its 2011-2012 budget, as well as to provide sums to cover a newly negotiated local bargaining agreement, to provide staffing for an anticipated student enrollment in the Fall of 2011, and to establish a reserve to cover urgent but unforeseen expenditures in the next budget year.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application in part.

Injunctions - Topic 1609

Interlocutory or interim injunctions - General principles - Circumstances when injunction will issue - The plaintiffs brought an action against the government of Saskatchewan for declaratory orders and permanent injunctive relief requiring Saskatchewan to provide sufficient funding for the minority language school system (CSF) - They claimed that the CSF had been chronically underfunded prohibiting it from fulfilling its constitutional mandate under s. 23 of the Charter - The plaintiffs applied for an interlocutory mandatory injunction ordering Saskatchewan to (1) provide extra funding to the CSF to meet an anticipated 2.3 million dollar shortfall in its 2011-2012 budget, (2) provide sums to cover a newly negotiated local bargaining agreement and staffing for an anticipated student enrollment in the Fall of 2011, and (3) establish a reserve to cover urgent but unforeseen expenditures in the next budget year - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the application in part - First, the plaintiffs had established that there was a serious issue to be tried - Second, with regard to the budget shortfall of 2.3 million dollars, being the difference between the amount which would be expended in the 2010-2011 school year of 28.3 million dollars and the amount which Saskatchewan offered for the 2011-2012 school year of 26 million dollars, there was a strong likelihood that the plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm if the CSF was required to make the budget cuts - Finally, greater harm would befall the CSF if a mandatory injunction was refused than would befall Saskatchewan if the remedy was granted - The court allowed the application with respect to demands (1) and (3) - See paragraphs 33 to 49.

Injunctions - Topic 1883

Interlocutory or interim injunctions - Evidence and proof - Burden of proof on application for - The plaintiffs brought an action against the government of Saskatchewan for declaratory orders and permanent injunctive relief requiring Saskatchewan to provide sufficient funding for the minority language school system (CSF) - They claimed that the CSF had been chronically underfunded prohibiting it from fulfilling its constitutional mandate under s. 23 of the Charter - The plaintiffs applied for an interlocutory mandatory injunction ordering Saskatchewan to immediately provide extra funding to the CSF to meet an anticipated 2.3 million dollar shortfall in its 2011-2012 budget, as well as to provide sums to cover a newly negotiated local bargaining agreement, to provide staffing for an anticipated student enrollment in the Fall of 2011, and to establish a reserve to cover urgent but unforeseen expenditures in the next budget year - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the three criteria for interlocutory injunctive relief in RJR-MacDonald Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General) (SCC 1994) applied and that "the threshold test for a mandatory injunction in this case, because it involves a Charter issue, is whether there is 'a serious question to be tried' and not the 'strong prima facie case' test." - See paragraphs 24 to 32.

Cases Noticed:

Mahe, Martel, Dubé and Association d'Ecole Georges et Julia Bugnet v. Alberta, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 342; 105 N.R. 321; 106 A.R. 321; [1990] 3 W.W.R. 97, consd. [para. 6].

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; 2000 SCC 1, consd. [para. 8].

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. 26].

Metropolitan Stores (MTS) Ltd. v. Manitoba Food and Commercial Workers, Local 832 and Labour Board (Man.), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 110; 73 N.R. 341; 46 Man.R.(2d) 241; [1987] 3 W.W.R. 1, refd to. [para. 26].

St. Brieux (Town) et al. v. Three Lakes No. 400 (Rural Municipality) et al., [2010] 11 W.W.R. 490; 354 Sask.R. 187; 2010 SKQB 73, refd to. [para. 28].

Metz et al. v. Board of Education of Prairie Valley School Division No. 208 (2007), 300 Sask.R. 161; 2007 SKQB 269, refd to. [para. 28].

Marchand v. Simcoe County (Board of Education) (1986), 55 O.R.(2d) 638 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 30].

Conseil Scolaire Fransaskois de Zenon Park et al. v. Saskatchewan et al., [1999] 3 W.W.R. 743; 170 Sask.R. 103 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 30].

Association des parents ayants droit de Yellowknife et al. v. Territoires du Nord-Ouest (Procureur général) et al., [2005] Northwest Terr. Cases (SC) 58; 2005 NWTSC 58, refd to. [para. 30].

Commission Scolaire Francophone et al. v. Northwest Territories (Attorney General) et al., [2008] Northwest Terr. Cases Uned. 53; 2008 NWTSC 53, refd to. [para. 30].

Commission Scolaire Francophone du Yukon No. 23 v. Yukon (Procureur général), [2010] Yukon Cases Uned. (SC) 43; 2010 YKSC 43, refd to. [para. 30].

La Plante et al. v. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Sask.) (2011), 371 Sask.R. 123; 518 W.A.C. 123; 2011 SKCA 43, refd to. [para. 31].

Doucet-Boudreau et al. v. Nova Scotia (Minister of Education) et al., [2003] 3 S.C.R. 3; 312 N.R. 1; 218 N.S.R.(2d) 311; 687 A.P.R. 311; 2003 SCC 62, refd to. [para. 41].

Counsel:

Roger J.F. Lepage and Francis P. Poulin, for the plaintiffs, applicants;

Alan F. Jacobson, for the defendant, respondent.

This application was heard by Chicoine, J., of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Regina, who delivered the following fiat on May 30, 2011.