Melia v. R.C. Sep. Sch. Bd., (1979) 1 Sask.R. 244 (CA)

Judge:Woods, Brownridge and Bayda, JJ.A.
Court:Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan
Case Date:December 31, 1979
Jurisdiction:Saskatchewan
Citations:(1979), 1 Sask.R. 244 (CA)
 
FREE EXCERPT

Melia v. R.C. Sep. Sch. Bd. (1979), 1 Sask.R. 244 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Melia et al. v. Moose Jaw R.C. Separate School District No. 22 et al.

(No. 7030)

Indexed As: Melia et al. v. Moose Jaw Roman Catholic School Division No. 22 et al.

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Woods, Brownridge and Bayda, JJ.A.

December 31, 1979.

Summary:

This case arose out of the referral to an arbitration board of several matters in a proposed collective agreement between a teacher's union and a school board. The teachers and the school board were unable to agree on payments to an educational leave fund. The arbitration board ordered that the school board pay annually $12,000.00 to the fund. The school board refused to implement the order of the arbitration board. The teachers commenced an action for a declaration that the award was binding on the school board.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench held that the arbitration board exceeded its jurisdiction when it ordered payments to the educational leave fund because the power to budget for revenues and expenses was given to the school board by statute. The teachers appealed to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and held that the arbitration board acted within its jurisdiction when it ordered the school board to pay annually $12,000.00 to the educational leave fund.

Arbitration - Topic 7950

Judicial review - Jurisdiction of arbitrator - General principles - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal stated that where an arbitration board acts within its jurisdiction it is not subject to judicial review even though the board wrongly answers the question referred to it - See paragraphs 9 and 10.

Arbitration - Topic 7960

Judicial review - Jurisdiction of arbitrator - Practice - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal stated that the powers of the courts are the same whether the judicial review requested is started by means of an application by way of certiorari or by a declaratory action - See paragraphs 11 to 14.

Arbitration - Topic 7961

Judicial review - Jurisdiction of arbitrator - Abuse of jurisdiction by arbitrator, terms of collective agreement - When a teacher's union and a school board were unable to agree on payments to an educational leave fund the matter was referred to an arbitration board pursuant to the provisions of the Teacher Collective Bargaining Act - The arbitration board ordered the school board to pay annually $12,000.00 to the fund - The school board argued that the arbitration board exceeded its jurisdiction because the power to budget for revenues and expenses was given to the school board by statute - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal affirmed the order of the arbitration board - The Court of Appeal stated that such an arbitration board does not exceed its jurisdiction because its award requires the expenditure of funds by a school board - See paragraph 32 - The Court of Appeal also approved an order of the arbitration board which constituted a reasonable variation of a section of the School Act - See paragraphs 39 to 44.

Cases Noticed:

Twentieth Century-Fox Corp. Ltd. v. Broadway Theatres Ltd., [1951] 3 D.L.R. 105, refd to. [para. 6].

L. Oppenheim and Company v. Mahomed Haneef, [1922] 1 A.C. 482, refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Labour Relations Board of Saskatchewan ex parte Tag's Plumbing and Heating Limited (1962), 34 D.L.R.(2d) 128, refd to. [para. 9].

Modern Press v. Saskatoon Typographical Union (1974), 45 D.L.R.(3d) 761, refd to. [para. 9].

Service Employees' International Union, Local No. 33 v. Nipawin District Staff Nurses Association et al., [1974] 1 W.W.R. 653, refd to. [para. 10].

Fraser and others v. City of Fraserville, [1917] A.C. 187, refd to. [para. 11].

Anisminic Ltd. v. Foreign Compensation Commission, [1969] 2 A.C. 147, refd to. [para. 13].

City of Swift Current v. Leslie et al., [1920] 1 W.W.R. 467, refd to. [para. 17].

Statutes Noticed:

Teacher Collective Bargaining Act, S.S. 1973, c. 112, sect. 8 [para. 25].

School Act, R.S.S. 1965, c. 184, sect. 118(32) [para. 37]; sect. 230(1) [para. 41].

Counsel:

H.H. Dahlem, for the appellant teachers;

F.L. Dunbar, for the respondent school boards.

This appeal was heard by WOODS, BROWNRIDGE and BAYDA, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The judgment of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal was delivered by BROWNRIDGE, J.A., at Regina, Saskatchewan, on December 31, 1979.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP