Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association v. Dufferin-Peel Roman Catholic Separate School Board, (1992) 61 O.A.C. 339 (DC)

JudgeCallaghan, C.J.O.C., O'Driscoll and Adams, JJ.
CourtOntario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
Case DateNovember 19, 1992
JurisdictionOntario
Citations(1992), 61 O.A.C. 339 (DC)

OECTA v. R.C. Sep. Sch. Bd. (1992), 61 O.A.C. 339 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

In the Matter of the Judicial Review Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 224; and In the Matter of the School Boards and Teachers Collective Negotiations Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 464; and In the Matter of an Award dated January 15, 1992, of a Board of Arbitration appointed pursuant to a collective agreement

Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association (applicant) v. Dufferin-Peel Roman Catholic Separate School Board, Kevin M. Burkett, John C. Murray and Melvin I. Rotman (respondents)

(No. 213/92)

Indexed As: Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association v. Dufferin-Peel Roman Catholic Separate School Board

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Divisional Court

Callaghan, C.J.O.C., O'Driscoll and Adams, JJ.

November 19, 1992.

Summary:

A Catholic priest was appointed chaplain at a separate school. The priest, a qualified teacher, requested that he retain his status as a teacher. The school board refused that request and told the priest that he was not covered by the teachers' collective agree­ment. The teachers' association grieved.

An arbitration board dismissed the griev­ance and held that the priest was not a teacher for purposes of the School Boards and Teachers Collective Bargaining Act. The association applied for judicial review.

The Ontario Divisional Court dismissed the application.

Education - Topic 6004

Teachers - Teacher defined - A Catholic priest, a qualified teacher, was appointed chaplain at a separate school - The priest requested that he retain his status as a teacher - The Ontario Divisional Court affirmed the decision of an arbitration board that such a chaplain's position was not a teaching position for purposes of the School Boards and Teachers Collective Bargaining Act.

Cases Noticed:

Paccar of Canada Ltd. v. Canadian Asso­ciation of Industrial, Mechanical and Allied Workers, Local 14, [1989] 2 S.C.R. 983; 102 N.R. 1; 62 D.L.R.(3d) 437; 89 C.L.L.C. 14,050; [1989] 6 W.W.R. 673; 40 Admin. L.R. 181, refd to. [para. 12].

Dayco (Canada) Ltd. v. National Automo­bile Aerospace and Agricultural Imple­ment Workers Union of Canada (CAW-Canada) (1990), 40 O.A.C. 219; 90 C.L.L.C. 14,040; 73 D.L.R.(4th) 718; 47 Admin. L.R. 1; 74 O.R.(2d) 648 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12].

Tiny Township v. R., [1927] S.C.R. 637; [1927] 4 D.L.R. 857, refd to. [para. 14].

Caldwell v. Catholic Schools of Vancouver Archdiocese, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 603; 56 N.R. 83; [1985] 1 W.W.R. 620; 85 C.L.L.C. 17,002; 15 D.L.R.(4th) 1; 6 C.H.R.R. D/2643, refd to. [para. 14].

Ontario Teachers' Foundation v. Metro­politan Separate School Board (1976), 13 O.R.(2d) 499; 71 D.L.R.(3d) 463 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

Statutes Noticed:

Education Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E-2, sect. 258, sect. 262 [para. 14].

School Board and Teachers Collective Negotiations Act, R.S.O. 1980, c. 464, sect. 1 [para. 14]; sect. 72 [para. 12].

Teaching Profession Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. T-2, sect. 1 [para. 14].

Counsel:

Paul J.J. Cavalluzzo, for the applicant;

Norman MacL. Rogers, Q.C., for the respondent, School Board.

The application was heard at Toronto, Ontario, on November 17, 1992, before Calla­ghan, C.J.O.C., O'Driscoll and Adams, JJ., of the Ontario Divisional Court.

The following judgment was endorsed on the appeal record and was released on No­vember 19, 1992.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT