Saskatchewan (Attorney General) ex rel. Ridge and M.C.C. Design Ltd. v. Saskatchewan Association of Architects, (1979) 1 Sask.R. 305 (CA)

• Judge: Culliton, C.J.S., Woods and Hall, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: December 20, 1979
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1979), 1 Sask.R. 305 (CA)

Sask. (A.G.) v. Architects Assoc. (1979), 1 Sask.R. 305 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Attorney General of Saskatchewan, ex. rel. Ridge and M.C.C. Design Ltd. v. Saskatchewan Association of Architects

Indexed As: Saskatchewan (Attorney General) ex rel. Ridge and M.C.C. Design Ltd. v. Saskatchewan Association of Architects

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Culliton, C.J.S., Woods and Hall, JJ.A.

December 20, 1979.

Summary:

This case arose out of an application to the Saskatchewan Association of Architects for a license and approval of a corporate name. The association refused to approve the corporate name because it might mislead the public. The association was empowered under its bylaws to approve the corporate names of members. The member applied to the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Crown Side for an order of mandamus to direct the association to consent to the use of the member's proposed name. The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench granted the application. The judgment of the Queen's Bench is set out below - see paragraphs 17 to 32. The association appealed to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench. The Court of Appeal dismissed the application for mandamus and stated that mandamus is not available to direct the exercise of a discretionary power in a particular way - see paragraph 14.

Administrative Law - Topic 3510

Judicial review - Mandamus - Review of exercise of discretionary power - The Saskatchewan Association of Architects refused to approve a corporate name for use by a member because the proposed name might mislead the public - The member applied for an order of mandamus to direct the association to approve the proposed name - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the application and stated that mandamus is not available to direct the exercise of a discretion in a particular way - See paragraph 14.

Administrative Law - Topic 1045

Classification of power or function - Powers classified as administrative - The Saskatchewan Association of Architects was empowered to refuse to approve a member's name which might mislead the public - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that such a power was an administrative power - See paragraph 12.

Cases Noticed:

Thorpe and Thorpe v. Village Motor Hotel Ltd. (1969), 70 W.W.R. 316, refd to. [para. 12].

Dirks v. Board of Trustees of Estevan Collegiate Institute (1970), 75 W.W.R. 368, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Johnson et al., [1979] 2 W.W.R. 571, refd to. [para. 13].

R. ex. rel. Lee v. Town of Estevan et al. (1951), 3 W.W.R.(N.S.) 513, refd to. [para. 13].

R. ex. rel. Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union, Local 9-649 et al. v. Nicol et al. (1965), 52 W.W.R. 434, refd to. [para. 14].

R. ex. rel. Central Canada Potash Co. Limited and Schmitt v. Minister of Mineral Resources of Saskatchewan, [1973] 1 W.W.R. 193, refd to. [para. 14].

R. ex. rel. Central Canada Potash Co. Limited and Schmitt v. Minister of Mineral Resources of Saskatchewan, [1973] 2 W.W.R. 672, refd to. [para. 15].

Statutes Noticed:

Architects Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. A-25, sect. 36(1) [para. 4]; sect. 7(2) [para. 5].

Counsel:

R.L. Barclay, for the appellant;

Brian J. Scherman, for the respondents.

This appeal was heard by CULLITON, C.J.S., WOODS and HALL, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by CULLITON, C.J.S., at Regina, Saskatchewan, on December 20, 1979.