Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v. British Columbia (Attorney General)

Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia v. British Columbia (Attorney General)

Majority: Provinces may impose hearing fees under s.92(14) but that power is limited by s.96 and the rule of law; hearing fees that cause undue hardship and effectively prevent litigants from accessing superior courts infringe the core jurisdiction protected by s.96 and are unconstitutional. The B.C. hearing fee scheme as enacted and applied lacked sufficient exemptions/judicial discretion and therefore must be declared invalid; reading-in was inappropriate; Ms. Vilardell relieved from the fee.

Citation
2014 SCC 59
Parties
Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal: Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia; Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal: Canadian Bar Association — British Columbia Branch; Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal: Attorney General of British Columbia
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Law (access to Justice; Court Hearing Fees) / Appeal and Cross Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Adjudication)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed; hearing fee scheme declared unconstitutional as inconsistent with s.96 and the rule of law; Ms. Vilardell excused from paying the hearing fee.
Legal Topics
Access to Justice, Court Hearing Fees, Section 92(14), Section 96, Rule of Law, Unwritten Constitutional Principles, Ultra Vires, Remedies (reading In; Declaration)
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Civil Procedure Family Law Access to Justice Court Hearing Fees Section 92(14) Section 96 +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia

Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal

Canadian Bar Association — British Columbia Branch

Appellant/respondent on Cross Appeal

Attorney General of British Columbia

Respondent/appellant on Cross Appeal

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Law (access to Justice; Court Hearing Fees) / Appeal and Cross Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Adjudication)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether provincial hearing fee scheme valid under s.92(14) of the Constitution Act, 1867
  2. 2 Whether hearing fees that deny access to superior courts infringe s.96 core jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether the rule of law or unwritten constitutional principles require constitutional protection for access to civil courts

Ratio Decidendi

Majority: Provinces may impose hearing fees under s.92(14) but that power is limited by s.96 and the rule of law; hearing fees that cause undue hardship and effectively prevent litigants from accessing superior courts infringe the core jurisdiction protected by s.96 and are unconstitutional. The B.C. hearing fee scheme as enacted and applied lacked sufficient exemptions/judicial discretion and therefore must be declared invalid; reading-in was inappropriate; Ms. Vilardell relieved from the fee.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed; hearing fee scheme declared unconstitutional as inconsistent with s.96 and the rule of law; Ms. Vilardell excused from paying the hearing fee.

Orders

  • Declare B.C. hearing fee scheme (Supreme Court Rules / Supreme Court Civil Rules Schedule 1 Appendix C provisions challenged) unconstitutional as it stands
  • Set aside Court of Appeal order that 'read in' words to expand the exemption provision