Municipal Contracting Ltd. v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 721, and Kydd, (1988) 85 N.S.R.(2d) 410 (TD)

• Judge: Davison, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: April 14, 1988
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1988), 85 N.S.R.(2d) 410 (TD)

Municipal Contracting v. IUOE (1988), 85 N.S.R.(2d) 410 (TD);

    216 A.P.R. 410

MLB headnote and full text

Municipal Contracting Limited (applicant) v. Local 721 of the International Union of Operating Engineers and William H. Kydd (respondents)

(S.H. No. 62798)

Indexed As: Municipal Contracting Ltd. v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 721, and Kydd

Nova Scotia Supreme Court

Trial Division

Davison, J.

June 29, 1988.

Summary:

An employer applied for certiorari to quash the decision of an arbitrator appointed pursuant to s. 103(4) of the Trade Union Act.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, allowed the application.

Administrative Law - Topic 2484

Natural justice - Procedure - At hearing - Adjournments - Section 107(3) of the Trade Union Act required an arbitrator to render a decision within 48 hours of his appointment - An employer was not notified of a union's intent to have an arbitrator appointed, therefore the employer had only 24 hours' notice of the hearing - The union had 10 days to prepare its case - The employer's solicitor was unavailable - The employer sought an adjournment, which the arbitrator refused - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, held that the arbitrator erred in finding that he had no discretion to grant an adjournment - In any event, where the employer did not have a sufficient opportunity to be heard or to prepare its case, the failure to grant an adjournment constituted a denial of natural justice - See paragraphs 69 to 92.

Administrative Law - Topic 5008

Judicial review - Certiorari - Scope of review - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, stated that certiorari was an investigation into the propriety of the processes that led to an arbitrator's decision and was available to correct errors of law on the face of the record or jurisdictional errors - An error of interpretation became an error of law only if the arbitrator's interpretation was patently unreasonable - Jurisdictional error occurred where the tribunal acted in bad faith, based its decision on irrelevant considerations, failed to consider relevant factors, breached the rules of natural justice or misinterpreted a statute - See paragraphs 56 to 64.

Arbitration - Topic 3665

The arbitrator - Duties - Respecting fact findings - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, stated that an arbitrator was not required to make an express finding on each and every constituent element leading to his conclusion - See paragraph 67.

Arbitration - Topic 4632

The hearing - Procedure at hearing - Adjournments - [See Administrative Law - Topic 2484 above].

Arbitration - Topic 5643

The award - Time for making an award - Limitation periods - Application of - [See Civil Rights - Topic 5668 below].

Civil Rights - Topic 5501

Equality and protection of the law - Equality rights defined - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, discussed the inconsistent approaches used in interpreting equality rights under s. 15(1) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms - See paragraphs 21 to 55.

Civil Rights - Topic 5513

Equality and protection of the law - Charter, s. 15 - "Individual" defined - A corporation affected by s. 103(7) of the Trade Union Act claimed s. 103 (7) violated s. 15 of the Charter - The union submitted that the corporation was not an "individual" and therefore lacked status to seek the protection of s. 15 - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, held that the corporation had status to challenge s. 103(7) - The court held that whether the corporation was an "individual" was not relevant; if s. 103(7) was contrary to s. 15 it could not be enforced against any party, including corporations, because it would be of no force and effect - See paragraph 20.

Civil Rights - Topic 5668

Equality and protection of the law - Particular cases - Labour legislation - Part II of the Trade Union Act, S.N.S. 1972, c. 19, provided for speedy resolution of disputes in the construction industry - An arbitrator was to be appointed and a decision was to be rendered within 48 hours of his appointment (s. 103(7)) - Part I of the Act, which dealt with nonconstruction industries, had similar arbitration provisions but no 48 hour time limit - An employer claimed s. 103(7) discriminated against the construction industry contrary to s. 15 (1) of the Charter - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, stated that a proper interpretation of s. 15 precluded the suggestion that legislation which differentiated on the basis of industry violated equality rights - Alternatively, the court held that the construction and nonconstruction industries were not similarly situated, therefore s. 103(7) could not violate s. 15(1) - The court noted that the construction industry was seasonal, had a transient work force and was single-project oriented - See paragraphs 16 to 55.

Civil Rights - Topic 8305

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application of - Persons protected - Corporations - [See Civil Rights - Topic 5513 above].

Civil Rights - Topic 8461

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Interpretation - General - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, stated that the Charter should be interpreted liberally, contextually and purposively - See paragraph 23.

Civil Rights - Topic 8462

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Interpretation - Purposive test - The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, discussed the purposive approach in interpreting Charter rights - See paragraph 24.

Cases Noticed:

Dywidag Systems International Canada Limited v. Zutphen Brothers Construction Limited (1987), 76 N.S.R.(2d) 398; 189 A.P.R. 398; 35 D.L.R.(4th) 433 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Big M Drug Mart Limited, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295; 58 N.R. 81; 60 A.R. 161; 18 C.C.C.(3d) 385; [1985] 3 W.W.R. 481; 13 C.R.R. 64; 18 D.L.R.(4th) 321, refd to. [para. 20].

Andrews v. Law Society of British Columbia (1986), 27 D.L.R.(4th) 600 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

Skapinker v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 357; 53 N.R. 169; 3 O.A.C. 321; 11 C.C.C.(3d) 481; 8 C.R.R. 193; 9 D.L.R.(4th) 161, consd. [para. 23].

R. v. DuBois (1985), 62 N.R. 50; 66 A.R. 202 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 23].

Southam Inc. v. Hunter, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145; 55 N.R. 241; 55 A.R. 291; 9 C.R.R. 355; 14 C.C.C.(3d) 97; 41 C.R.(3d) 97; [1984] 6 W.W.R. 577; 33 Alta. L.R.(2d) 193; 27 B.L.R. 297; 84 D.T.C. 6467; 2 C.P.R.(3d) 1; 11 D.L.R.(4th) 641, consd. [para. 23].

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335; 24 C.C.C. (3d) 321; 50 C.R.(3d) 1; 26 D.L.R. (4th) 200, consd. [para. 27].

Smith, Kline and French Laboratories v. Canada (Attorney General) (1986), 78 N.R. 30; 12 C.P.R.(3d) 385; 34 D.L.R.(4th) 584 (F.C.A.), agreed with [para. 33].

R. v. Ertel (1987), 20 O.A.C. 257; 58 C.R.(3d) 252 (C.A.), disagreed with [para. 35].

R. v. Century 21 Ramos Realty Inc. (1987), 19 O.A.C. 25; 32 C.C.C.(3d) 353 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Datta v. Saskatchewan Medical Care Insurance Commission (1986), 52 Sask.R. 18; 33 D.L.R.(4th) 507 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

Reference Re Family Benefits Act (N.S.) Section 5 (1980), 75 N.S.R.(2d) 338; 186 A.P.R. 338 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Hardiman (1987), 78 N.S.R.(2d) 55; 193 A.P.R. 55 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. R.L. (1986), 14 O.A.C. 318; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 417 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 45].

Yorkdale Drywall Limited v. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local 83 (1987), 79 N.S.R.(2d) 444; 196 A.P.R. 444 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 53].

International Association of Firefighters, Local 268 v. City of Halifax (1982), 50 N.S.R.(2d) 299; 98 A.P.R. 299 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 54].

Ontario Public Service Employees Union v. Forer and Ontario Public Service Labour Relations Tribunal (1985), 12 O.A.C. 1; 23 D.L.R.(4th) 95 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 58].

Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 313; 74 N.R. 99; 78 A.R. 1, refd to. [para. 59].

Reference Re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta.) - see Reference Re Compulsory Arbitration.

Service Employees International Union, Local 333 v. Nipawin District Staff Nurses Association, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 382, refd to. [para. 60].

Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 963 v. New Brunswick Liquor Corporation, [1979] 2 S.C.R. 227; 26 N.R. 341; 25 N.B.R.(2d) 237; 51 A.P.R. 237; 97 D.L.R.(3d) 417; 79 C.L.L.C. 14,209, refd to. [para. 62].

Robert and United Metallurgists of America, Local 4589 v. Bombardier - M.L.W. Ltd. and Brody (1980), 32 N.R. 426; 112 D.L.R.(3d) 61 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 63].

Municipal Spraying and Contracting Limited v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 721 (1977), 21 N.S.R.(2d) 351; 28 A.P.R. 351 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 70].

Scott v. Rent Review Commission (1977), 23 N.S.R.(2d) 504; 32 A.P.R. 504 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 72].

R.D.R. Construction v. Rent Review Commission (1982), 55 N.S.R.(2d) 71; 114 A.P.R. 71 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 74].

Jim Patrick Limited v. United Stone and Allied Product Workers (1960), 21 D.L.R.(2d) 189, refd to. [para. 77].

Re Romm (1957), 7 D.L.R.(2d) 378 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 78].

Statutes Noticed:

Trade Union Act, S.N.S. 1972, c. 19, sect. 40(1), sect. 40(2), sect. 40(3), sect. 41(1) [para. 16]; sect. 90(1) [para. 49]; sect. 103(1), sect. 103(3), sect. 103(4), sect. 103(6), sect. 103(7), sect. 103(8), sect. 103(9) [para. 17].

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 15(1) [para. 21].

Constitution Act, 1982, sect. 52(1).

Authors and Works Noticed:

Lepofski, M.D., and Schwartz, H., Constitutional Law - Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Section 15 - An Erroneous Approach to the Charter's Equality Guarantee: R. v. Ertel (1988), 67 Can. Bar Rev. 115 [para. 36].

de Smith, Judicial Review of Administrative Action (4th Ed.), pp. 200, 213 [para. 76].

Black's Law Dictionary (5th Ed.), para. 89.

Counsel:

George M. Mitchell, Q.C., and Thomas P. Donovan, for the applicant;

Ronald A. Pink, Joel E. Fichaud and Gordon N. Forsyth, for the respondent;

Alison Scott, for the Attorney General.

This application was heard on April 14, 1988, at Halifax, Nova Scotia, in Chambers before Davison, J., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Trial Division, who delivered the following judgment on June 29, 1988.