Notes
Page 21 of 21
1 DesRochers v. Canada (Industry), [2009] 1 S.R.C. 194, 2009 SCC 8 at para. 54.
2 Mahe v. Alberta, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 342 at 344.
3 Solski (Tutor of) v. Quebec (Attorney General), [2005] 1 S.C.R. 201, 2005 SCC 14 at para. 35.
4 H.N. v. Québec (Ministre de l’Éducation), [2007] R.J.Q. 2097, 2007 QCCA 1111.
5 T.B. v. Québec (Ministre de l’Éducation), [2007] R.J.Q. 2150, 2007 QCCA 1112.
7 Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11.
8 (2008) 290 D.L.R. (4th) 490, 2008 ONCA 148.
9 (2007) 246 B.C.A.C. 159, 2007 YKCA 12.
12 [2008] 1 S.C.R. 383, 2008 SCC 15.
15 Reference re Public Schools Act (Man.), s. 79(3), (4) and (7), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 839 at 862.
18 Arsenault-Cameron v. Prince Edward Island, [2000] 1 S.C.R. 3; 2000 SCC 1 at para. 27.
24 Doucet-Boudreau v. Nova Scotia (Minister of Education), [2003] 3 S.C.R. 3, 2003 SCC 62.
26 S. 23(1)(a) of the Charter was never proclaimed in force in Quebec: see s. 59 of the Constitution Act, 1982, being Schedule B to the Canada Act, 1982 (U.K.), 1982. c. 11.
30 2nd Sess., 36th Leg., Quebec, 2002 (which came into force October 1, 2002), S.Q. 2002, c. 28.
33 Abbey v. Essex County Board of Education [1999], 42 O.R. (3d) 481.
52 File No S-0001-CV-2008000133.
57 Supra note 3 at para. 50; see also Gosselin (Tutor of) v. Quebec (A.G.), [2005] 1 S.C.R. 238, 2005 SCC 15 at paras. 28–34.
59 Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817.
60 Supra note 56 at para. 22, citing Ibid. at para. 26.
62 30 & 31 Vict., c. 3 (U.K.), as reprinted in R.S.C., 1985, Appendix II, No. 5.
63 [2008] 2 F.C.R. 327, 2007 FCA 308.
66 File No 32416, application for leave to appeal dismissed on March 20, 2008.
67 An Act to amend the Criminal Code (criminal procedure, language of the accused, sentencing and other amendments), 2nd Sess., 39th Parl., 2008.
68 R. v. Beaulac, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 768 at para. 34, citing Ford v. Quebec (Attorney General), [1988] 2 S.C.R. 712 at 749.
69 Commissioner of Official Languages (Can.) v. Canada (Minister of Justice), (2001) 194 F.T.R. 181, 2001 FCT 239.
70 Under s. 3(2) of the OLA, a federal court is "any court, tribunal or other body that carries out adjudicative functions and is established by or pursuant to an Act of Parliament." This includes courts of law such as the Federal Courts of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada, as well as quasi-judicial administrative tribunals such as the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal and the Canadian Industrial Relations Board.
71 S. 19 of the Charter also applies to any court of New Brunswick.
72 This duty applies to all federal tribunals other than the Supreme Court of Canada: see s. 16 of the OLA.
73 S. 19 of the Charter (New Brunswick), s. 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867 (Quebec) and s. 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870 (Manitoba).
77 Ibid. This right is enshrined in s. 14 of the Charter, according to which "A party or witness in any proceedings who does not understand or speak the language in which the proceedings are conducted or who is deaf has the right to the assistance of an interpreter."
82 Ibid. at para. 27; Civil Justice Reform Project at para. 13, online: The Ministry of the Attorney General www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/cjrp/
.
85 Rules of Court for the Supreme Court of Yukon pursuant to s. 38 of the Judicature Act, R.S.Y. 2002, c. 128.
90 Société des Acadiens du Nouveau-Brunswick Inc. v. Association of Parents, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 549.
99 Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.), 1982, c. 11.
102 Supra note 10 at para. 42.
104 (Canada), 33 Vict., c. 3. Section 23: Either the English or the French language may be used by any person in the debates of the Houses of the Legislature and both those languages shall be used in the respective Records and Journals of those Houses; and either of those languages may be used by any person, or in any Pleading or Process, in or issuing from any Court of Canada established under the Constitution Act, 1867, or in or from all or any of the Courts of the Province. The Acts of the Legislature shall be Printed and published in both those languages.
106 38 Vict., c. 49. Section 11: Either the English or the French language may be used by any person in the debates of the said Council, and in the proceedings before the Courts, and both those languages shall be used in the records and journals of the said Council, and the ordinances of the said Council shall be printed in both those languages.
107 Pursuant to s. 146 of the Constitution Act, 1867 and Rupert’s Land Act, 1868, 31-32 Vict., c. 105 (U.K.).
115 Hilton J.A. explained that, with consecutive translation, the interpreter listens to what is said in one language and then provides an appropriate translation in another language, and that this translation can be heard by the accused, the trial judge, both counsel and the jury, if one is present. With simultaneous translation, only the appellant can hear the interpreter, through an earpiece. No one else in the courtroom can hear the interpreter, and there is no record of what the interpreter said and thus no transcript of what the interpreter said. Hilton J.A. noted that the fulfillment of the language guarantee available to an accused is better served by consecutive rather than simultaneous interpretation.
116 Supra note 112 at para. 62.
119 Supra note 112 at para. 89.
124 Jones v. Attorney General of New Brunswick, [1975] 2 S.C.R. 182.
125 Ibid. at para. 36, citing Canadian Western Bank v. Alberta, [2007] 2 S.C.R. 3, 2007 SCC 22, at para. 69.
126 [2000] 2 S.C.R. 595, 2000 SCC 50.
129 R.S.C. 1985, c. 31 (4th Supp.).
130 Société des Acadiens et Acadiennes du Nouveau-Brunswick v. Canada (F.C.), [2006] 1 F.C.R. 490, 2005 FC 1172.
132 Société des Acadiens et Acadiennes du Nouveau-Brunswick v. Canada (F.C.A), [2007] 2 F.C.R. 177, 2006 FCA 196.
135 Supra note 12 at para. 15.
140 277 D.L.R. (4th) 621, 2007 NBCA 11.
143 (2007) 321 N.B.R. (2d) 234, 2007 NBPC 30.
149 Supra note 144 at para. 15 [translated by author].
150 Ibid. at para. 31 [translated by author].
153 Supra note 151 at para. 4.
154 Ibid. at para. 12, citing R. v. Woods, 2005 SCC 42.
157 R.S.C. 1985, c. 1 (5th Supp.).
158 Supra note 156 at para. 25.
160 (2007) 375 N.R. 175, 2007 FCA 115.
162 [2006] 2 F.C.R. 70, 292 F.T.R. 67, 2005 FC 1156.
165 Fédération Franco-ténoise v. Canada (Attorney General), 2006 NWTSC 20.
166 Supra note 24 at paras. 55–59: First, the remedy must meaningfully vindicate the rights and freedoms of the claimant, taking into consideration the nature of the violated right, the situation of the claimant, and the experience of the claimant in attempting to enforce the right. Second, the remedy must strive to respect the relationship with and the separation of functions between the executive and judiciary. While a remedy may touch on the function of the executive, courts should not unduly or unnecessarily depart from their roles of adjudicating disputes and granting remedies that address the matter of those disputes. Third, the remedy must vindicate the right at issue while invoking the court’s powers. Courts should not leap into decisions and functions for which they are unsuited. Fourth, remedies must be fair to the party against whom they are ordered and should not impose substantial hardships that are unrelated to securing the right. Finally, an appropriate and just remedy is one that is "flexible and responsive to the needs of a given case."
Para. 59: Charter rights are evolving and may require novel and creative features.
167 Supra note 68 at para. 24 that "the exercise of language rights must not be considered as exceptional or as something in the nature of a request for an accommodation" and such rights "require government action for their implementation and therefore create obligations for the State."
168 Supra note 163 at para. 133.
171 File No 32924, application for leave to appeal dismissed on March 5, 2009.
174 Supra note 172 at para. 10.
176 DesRochers v. Canada (Industry) (F.C.), [2005] 4 F.C.R. 3, 2005 FC 987.
177 DesRochers v. Canada (Industry) (F.C.A.), [2007] 3 F.C.R. 3, 2006 FCA 374.
178 Supra note 177 at paras. 33 and 38.
