Singer (Allan) Ltd. v. Québec (Procureur général) et al., (1988) 90 N.R. 48 (SCC)

• Judge: Dickson, C.J., Beetz, Estey, McIntyre, Lamer, Wilson and Le Dain, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: December 15, 1988
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1988), 90 N.R. 48 (SCC);10 CHRR 5610;[1988] 2 SCR 790;36 CRR 64;19 QAC 33;55 DLR (4th) 641;90 NR 48;1988 CanLII 20 (SCC)

Singer Ltd. v. Qué. (P.g.) (1988), 90 N.R. 48 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

.........................

Allan Singer Ltd. (appellant) v. Le Procureur General du Quebec (respondent) and Attorney General of Canada, Attorney General of New Brunswick and Attorney General of Ontario (interveners)

(20297)

Indexed As: Singer (Allan) Ltd. v. Québec (Procureur général) et al.

Supreme Court of Canada

Dickson, C.J., Beetz, Estey, McIntyre, Lamer, Wilson and Le Dain, JJ.

December 15, 1988.

Summary:

Allan Singer Ltd. (Singer) brought an action in nullity of the following provisions of Quebec's Charter of the French Language and the Regulation respecting the language of commerce and business adopted under the Charter. Charter : 1) s. 52 respecting the language of commercial publications; 2) s. 57 respecting the language of employment application forms, order forms, invoices, receipts and quittances; 3) ss. 58 to 61 respecting the language of public signs and advertising generally; 4) s. 214 providing that the Charter applies notwithstanding the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Regulation : 1) s. 8 respecting the language of public signs and advertising relating to cultural and educational products and activities; 2) s. 9 respecting the language of undisplayed commercial advertising; 3) s. 12 respecting the language of public signs posted by an individual on his property; 4) s. 13 respecting the language of public signs and commercial advertising relating to an international event or one at which the majority of participants come from outside Quebec; 5) s. 14 respecting the language of public signs and commercial advertising used in an event intended for a specialized public; 6) s. 15 respecting the language of commercial publications distributed in a public place; 7) s. 16 respecting the language of certain names and expressions; 8) s. 19 respecting the language of public signs and commercial advertising placed inside or outside means of transport.

Singer sought the following remedies: 1) a declaration that the above mentioned Charter of the French Language provisions are ultra vires the legislative jurisdiction of Quebec or, alternatively, 2) a declaration that the above mentioned provisions are inoperative because they violate freedom of expression and equality rights provisions found in Quebec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms (ss. 3 and 10 respectively).

The Quebec Superior Court dismissed the action. (See [1982] C.S. 355). Singer appealed.

The Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. (See [1987] R.J.Q. 50; 5 Q.A.C. 81; 36 D.L.R.(4th) 321). Singer appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada and raised there for the first time the freedom of expression and equality rights provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (ss. 2(b) and 15 respectively).

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal in part. The court held: 1) the above mentioned Charter of the French Language provisions are intra vires the legislative jurisdiction of Quebec; 2) s. 214 of the Charter of the French Language is inoperative only insofar as it has retrospective effect; 3) ss. 52 and 58 of the Charter of the French Language apply notwithstanding the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms because of a valid notwithstanding clause; 4) s. 52 of the Charter of the French Language violates the freedom of expression provision of Quebec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms but not its equality rights provision. This section is justified by the limiting provision of s. 9.1 of Quebec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and can therefore operate; 5) ss. 58, 59, 60 and 61 of the Charter of the French Language and ss. 8 and 9 and 12 to 19 of the Regulation violate the freedom of expression and equality rights provisions of Quebec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. These sections are not justified by the limiting provision of s. 9.1 of Quebec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. They are inoperative; 6) ss. 59, 60 and 61 of the Charter of the French Language and s. 8 and 9 and 12 to 19 of the Regulation violate the freedom of expression provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These sections are not a reasonable limit under s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They are inoperative; 7) s. 57 of the Charter of the French Language violates the freedom of expression provisions of the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. S. 57 does not violate the equality rights provision of Quebec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. S. 57 is justified by the limiting provision of s. 9.1 of Quebec's Charter of Rights and Freedoms and is also a reasonable limit under s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This section can operate.

Civil Rights - Topic 585

Mobility rights - Violation, what constitutes - Language requirements - The Supreme Court of Canada held that provisions of Quebec's Charter of the French Language and regulations adopt ed thereunder requiring the exclusive use of French on public signs and commercial advertising and the nonexclusive use of French in commercial documents and publications and employment application forms do not violate the mobility rights provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - See paragraph 19.

Civil Rights - Topic 1803

Freedom of expression, scope of - Allan Singer Ltd. raised the freedom of expression provisions of s. 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and s. 3 of Quebec's Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms to challenge the validity of certain provisions of Quebec's Charter of the French Language and regulations adopt ed thereunder requiring the mandatory use of French - The Supreme Court of Canada examined the language provisions challenged in the light of the human rights provisions raised and the limiting provisions contained in the Canadian and Quebec Charters of Rights and Freedoms and held that freedom of expression "extended to protect the freedom to express oneself in the language of one's choice ... [but not] ... to guarantee a right to express oneself exclusively in one's own language" - See paragraphs 23 to 30.

Civil Rights - Topic 1847

Freedom of expression - Limitations on - Regulation of advertising and commercial use of language - Quebec's Charter of the French Language limited freedom of expression by providing for the exclusive use of French on public signs and commercial advertising and the non-exclusive use of French in commercial documents and publications and employment application forms - Were these provisions acceptable limits to freedom of expression under the Canadian and Quebec Charters of Rights and Freedoms? - The Supreme Court of Canada examined whether these provisions were rationally connected to the Quebec legislature's pressing and substantial concern to ensure that Quebec's linguistic visage reflect the predominance of the French language and held that the provisions requiring the exclusive use of French were not acceptable limits but that the provisions requiring the nonexclusive use were - See paragraphs 23 to 30.

Civil Rights - Topic 5674

Equality rights - Language of commerce and business - Quebec's Charter of the French Language provided for the exclusive use of French on public signs and commercial advertising and the nonexclusive use of French in catalogues, brochures, folders, order forms, receipts, quittances, invoices and employment application forms - Did these provisions violate the applicable equality rights provisions in the Canadian and Quebec Charters of Rights and Freedoms? - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the following constituted such a violation: exclusive use of French on public signs and commercial advertising and nonexclusive use of French in catalogues, brochures, folders and similar publications - Nonexclusive use of French in order forms, receipts, quittances, invoices and employment application forms did not violate equality rights - The court went on to hold, however, that nonexclusive use of French in catalogues, brochures, folders and similar publications was an acceptable limit on equality rights under the Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms notwithstanding the violation - See paragraphs 28 to 31.

Constitutional Law - Topic 7292

Provincial jurisdiction - S. 92, Constitution Act 1867 - Property and civil rights, regulatory legislation - Language of commerce including advertising and business signs - Quebec's Charter of the French Language provided for the exclusive use of French on public signs and commercial advertising and the nonexclusive use of French in commercial documents and publications and employment application forms - The Supreme Court of Canada held that these provisions were intra vires provincial jurisdiction because they were a valid incidental aspect of the regulation of provincial commerce - See paragraphs 13 to 18.

Statutes - Topic 4551

Operation and effect - Validity - Effect of declaration of inoperativeness - The Supreme Court of Canada held that when declaring a statute section inoperative, a court must be careful not to defeat or reverse the intention of the legislator - Hence, when declaring inoperative a section enacting a rule, the sections enacting the exception to the rule fall also because they were a part of the entire statutory scheme based on the rule - By failing to include the exceptions, these would become the rule when the original rule fell - This would then constitute an unacceptable reversal of the legislative intention which originally was to create exceptions to a rule and not a rule - See paragraphs 24 to 26.

Cases Noticed:

Chaussure Brown's Inc. v. Québec (Procureur général) (1989), 90 N.R. 84, refd to. [para. 10].

Cusson v. Robidoux, [1977] 1 R.C.S. 650; 10 N.R. 592, folld. [para. 10].

Jones v. Procureur général du Nouveau Brunswick, [1975] 2 R.C.S. 185, folld. [para. 14].

Rio Hotel Ltd. v. Liquor Licensing Board (N.B.) et al., [1987] 2 R.C.S. 59; 77 N.R. 104, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Big M. Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 R.C.S. 295; 58 N.R. 81; 60 A.R. 161, folld. [para. 23].

R. v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 R.C.S. 30; 82 N.R. 1, folld. [para. 26].

Forget v. Québec (Procureur général), [1988] 2 R.C.S. 90; 87 N.R. 37; 17 Q.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 R.C.S. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335, appld. [para. 31].

R. v. Videoflicks Ltd. et al., [1986] 2 R.C.S. 713; 71 N.R. 161, appld. [para. 31].

Statutes Noticed:

Constitution Act, Act respecting the, S.Q. 1982, c. 21, sect. 1, sect. 7.

Charter of the French Language, R.S.Q. 1977, c. C-11, sect. 1, sect. 52, sect. 57, sect. 58, sect. 59, sect. 60, sect. 61, sect. 62, sect. 69, sect. 89, sect. 205, sect. 206, sect. 207, sect. 208, sect. 214.

Charter of the French Language, Act to amend the, S.Q. 1983, c. 56, sect. 52.

Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, R.S.Q. 1977, c. C-12, sect. 3, sect. 9.1, sect. 10, sect. 15, sect. 52.

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, sect. 1, sect. 2(b), sect. 6, sect. 15, sect. 33.

Constitution Act, 1867, sect. 92, sect. 121, sect. 133.

Constitution Act, 1982, sect. 52.

Charter of the French Language, Regulation respecting the language of commerce and business, R.R.Q. 1981, c. C-11, rule 9, sect. 8, sect. 9, sect. 12, sect. 13, sect. 14, sect. 15, sect. 16, sect. 19.

Authors and Works Noticed:

Chevrette, François, La disposition limitative de la Charte des droits et libertés de la personne: le dit et le non-dit (1987), 21 R.J.T. 461 [para. 30].

Hogg, Peter, Constitutional Law of Canada (2nd Ed. 1985) [para. 14].

Le Dain, Gerald, The Supervisory Jurisdiction in Quebec (1957), 36 Can. Bar Rev. 788 [para. 10].

Confederation Debates [para. 17].

Counsel:

Joseph Eliot Magnet, for Allan Singer Ltd.;

Yves de Montigny, André Tremblay and Richard Tardif, for the Procureur général du Québec;

Georges Emery, Q.C., André Bluteau and René LeBlanc, for the Attorney General of Canada;

Grant S. Garneau, for the Attorney General of New Brunswick;

Lorraine E. Weinrib, for the Attorney General of Ontario.

Solicitors of Record:

Joseph Eliot Magnet, Ottawa, Ontario, for Allan Singer Ltd.;

Yves de Montigny and Jean-K. Samson, Ste-Foy, Quebec, for the Procureur général du Quebec;

Piché, Emery, Montreal, and André Bluteau and René LeBlanc, Ottawa, Ontario, for the Attorney General of Canada;

Gordon F. Gregory, Fredericton, New Brunswick, for the Attorney General of New Brunswick;

Richard F. Chaloner, Toronto, Ontario, for the Attorney General of Ontario.

This appeal was heard on November 18, 1987, by Dickson, C.J., Beetz, Estey, McIntyre, Lamer, Wilson and Le Dain, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.

The court delivered the following decisions on December 15, 1988: (Estey and Le Dain, JJ., did not take part in the judgment).