V.G. v. Board of Education of Wetaskiwin Regional Division No. 11, (1998) 226 A.R. 280 (QB)

• Judge: Johnstone, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: April 08, 1998
• Citations: (1998), 226 A.R. 280 (QB);1998 ABQB 600

V.G. v. Wetaskiwin School Bd. (1998), 226 A.R. 280 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1998] A.R. TBEd. JL.099

V.G. and K.G. (applicants/plaintiffs) v. The Board of Trustees of Wetaskiwin Regional Division No. 11 (respondent/defendant)

(9803-00058; 1998 ABQB 600)

Indexed As: V.G. v. Board of Education of Wetaskiwin Regional Division No. 11

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Edmonton

Johnstone, J.

July 13, 1998.

Summary:

The applicants claimed that the respondent Board of Trustees failed to provide their autistic son with the benefits of access to a special education program pursuant to s. 29 of the Schools Act. They argued that this should have been done by way of an educational placement in an inclusive setting in a regular grade seven classroom and that the fact that this was not done constituted a violation of s. 15(1) of the Charter. The applicants sought declaratory relief pursuant to s. 24(1) of the Charter.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that it was not appropriate to deal with the matter by way of a chambers application. The court directed that the matter proceed to a full trial of the issues.

Editor's Note: Certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.

Civil Rights - Topic 8586

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Practice - Method of raising Charter issues - The applicants claimed that the respondent Board of Trustees failed to provide their autistic son with the benefits of access to a special education program pursuant to s. 29 of the Schools Act - They argued that this should have been done by way of an educational placement in an inclusive setting in a regular grade seven classroom and that the fact that this was not done constituted a violation of s. 15(1) of the Charter - The applicants sought declaratory relief pursuant to s. 24(1) of the Charter - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench held that it was not appropriate to deal with the matter by way of a chambers application - The court directed that the matter proceed to a full trial of the issues.

Practice - Topic 3082

Applications and motions - Applications - Disposition - Application to proceed as action - [See Civil Rights - Topic 8586 ].

Cases Noticed:

Board of Education of Whitecourt (Roman Catholic Separate) School District No. 94 et al. v. Alberta (1995), 169 A.R. 195; 97 W.A.C. 195 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Metropolitan Stores (MTS) Ltd. v. Manitoba Food and Commercial Workers, Local 832 and Labour Board (Man.), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 110; 73 N.R. 341; 46 Man.R.(2d) 241; 18 C.P.C.(2d) 273; 38 D.L.R.(4th) 321; 25 Admin. L.R. 20, refd to. [para. 21].

American Cyanamid Co. v. Ethicon Ltd., [1975] 1 All E.R. 504 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Johnson and Norton (1988), 93 A.R. 67 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 23].

Barke v. Calgary (City) (1993), 139 A.R. 15 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 24].

Energy Probe et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al. (1989), 33 O.A.C. 39; 68 O.R.(2d) 449 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (1989), 102 N.R. 399; 37 O.A.C. 160 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 24].

Spruce Grove (Town) v. Yellowhead Regional Library Board (1982), 44 A.R. 48 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 27].

Skagos v. Emery Jamieson et al. (1986), 72 A.R. 231 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 30].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Roach, Kent, Constitutional Remedies in Canada (1997), c. 5.520 [para. 23].

Counsel:

Penny Frederiksen (Ackroyd Piasta, Roth & Day), for the applicants;

C. Stevenson Struthers, for the respondent.

This application was heard on April 8, 1998, before Johnstone, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Edmonton, who delivered the following judgment on July 13, 1998.