Trinity Western University et al. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 2016 ONCA 518

• Judge: MacPherson, Cronk and Pardu, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: June 29, 2016
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: 2016 ONCA 518;(2016), 349 O.A.C. 163 (CA)

Trinity Western Univ. v. LSUC (2016), 349 O.A.C. 163 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] O.A.C. TBEd. JN.034

Trinity Western University and Brayden Volkenant (applicants/appellants) v. Law Society of Upper Canada (respondent/respondent)

(C61116; 2016 ONCA 518)

Indexed As: Trinity Western University et al. v. Law Society of Upper Canada

Ontario Court of Appeal

MacPherson, Cronk and Pardu, JJ.A.

June 29, 2016.

Summary:

The Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) Benchers voted to deny accreditation to a law school that Trinity Western University (TWU) proposed to create. TWU was an evangelical Christian university, that required its students to agree to the terms of a Community Covenant (i.e., a code of conduct that embodied evangelical Christian beliefs on human dignity and moral conduct). TWU applied for judicial review, seeking an order declaring that the LSUC's decision was unauthorized and otherwise invalid and approving TWU's application for accreditation. Among other things, TWU argued that the LSUC violated the right to freedom of religion (Charter, s. 2(a)).

The Ontario Divisional Court, in a decision reported 336 O.A.C. 265, dismissed the application for judicial review. The Divisional Court held that the decision had the effect of interfering with freedom of religion. However, the LSUC in the course of exercising its statutory authority, engaged in a proportionate balancing of the TWU's right to freedom of religion with the LSUC's members' and future members' right to equal opportunity, and arrived at a reasonable conclusion. TWU appealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The LSUC's decision not to accredit TWU was a reasonable conclusion. The court, therefore, upheld the Divisional Court's decision.

Administrative Law - Topic 9102

Boards and tribunals - Judicial review - Standard of review - See paragraphs 60 to 71.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 345

Admission to practice or as student-at-law - Qualifications - Canadian law degrees - See paragraphs 72 to 146.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 492

Admission to practice or as student-at-law - Judicial review or appeals - Standard of review - See paragraphs 60 to 71.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 7651.1

Regulation - Powers of governing bodies - Respecting accreditation of law schools - See paragraphs 72 to 146.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 7656

Regulation - Powers of governing bodies - Judicial review of (incl. standard of review) - See paragraphs 60 to 71.

Civil Rights - Topic 385

Freedom of conscience and religion - Infringement of - Schools - Religious education (incl. codes of conduct) - See paragraphs 72 to 146.

Civil Rights - Topic 8467

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Interpretation - Interrelationship among Charter rights - See paragraphs 112 to 146.

Education - Topic 4125

Universities - Courses or programs - Approval of - Considerations - See paragraphs 72 to 146.

Counsel:

Robert W. Staley, Derek J. Bell and Ranjan K. Agarwal, for the appellants;

Guy J. Pratte, Nadia Effendi and Duncan Ault, for the respondent;

Gerald D. Chipeur, Q.C. and Grace Mackintosh, for the intervener, the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada;

Daniel C. Santoro and Joshua Tong, for the intervener, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms;

Albertos Polizogopoulos, for the interveners, the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada and Christian Higher Education Canada;

André Marshall Schutten, for the intervener, the Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada;

Derek B.M. Ross and John R. Sikkema, for the intervener, the Christian Legal Fellowship;

Marlys Edwardh, Frances Mahon and Paul Jonathan Saguil, for the interveners, Out on Bay Street and OUTlaws;

Arden Beddoes, for the intervener, the Canadian Secular Alliance;

Susan Ursel and David Grossman, for the intervener, the Canadian Bar Association;

Gavin Magrath, for the intervener, Lawyers' Rights Watch Canada;

Alan L.W. D'Silva and Alexandra Urbanski, for the intervener, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association;

Chris Paliare and Joanna Radbord, for the intervener, the Advocates' Society;

John Norris, for the intervener, the Criminal Lawyers' Association (Ontario).

This appeal was heard on June 6 and 7, 2016, before MacPherson, Cronk and Pardu, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal. The following decision was delivered for the court by MacPherson, J.A., on June 29, 2016.