Canada Judgment

Supreme Court of Canada

Re Manitoba Language Rights Order

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Court has jurisdiction to hear the parties' constitutional questions; it will hear the matters put forward (substituting Alliance Québec's amended question for Manitoba's question 6) and, in the exercise of its discretion, it ordered that the prior continuation of temporary validity of Manitoba laws be further continued but limited only to the matters raised in this application until the hearing and judgment.

Court disposition

Application inscribed for hearing; temporary validity of Manitoba laws continued only as to matters raised in the application until hearing and judgment; question 6 of Manitoba replaced by Alliance Québec's amended question and the specified constitutional questions to be addressed at hearing

Orders

  • Inscribe the submitted constitutional questions for hearing (with Alliance Québec's amended question substituted for Manitoba's question 6)
  • Continue the order of November 4, 1985 ([1985] 2 S.C.R. 347) as regards the temporary validity of laws but only in relation to matters raised in this application until the hearing and judgment, subject to any further order of this Court
  • Refer the parties to the Chief Justice's Chambers to set a hearing date
  • Authorize the rota judge to settle other procedural matters within Chambers' jurisdiction
  • Serve this order upon all Attorneys General

02

Material facts

Parties

Attorney General of Manitoba

Applicant Counsel: Donna J. Miller; Deborah Carlson

Société franco‑manitobaine

Intervener Counsel: Michel Bastarache; Antoine F. Hacault

Roger Bilodeau

Intervener Counsel: Vaughan L. Baird, Q.C.

Fédération des francophones hors Québec

Intervener Counsel: François Dumaine

Alliance Québec

Intervener Counsel: Stephen A. Scott; Victoria Percival‑Hilton

Attorney General of Canada

Intervener Counsel: D. Martin Low, Q.C.; Warren J. Newman

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Reference Concerning Constitutional Language Rights Under S.23 Manitoba Act and S.133 Constitution Act / Inscribed for Special Hearing; Interim Order Continuing Temporary Validity of Laws Until Hearing and Judgment

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The Attorney General of Manitoba sought a hearing on specified constitutional questions and asked whether the Court could extend or establish a further period of temporary validity to cover orders in council, instruments and documents and their legal effects to permit Manitoba to conform to s.23; Manitoba asked whether invalid instruments could be rendered valid retroactively.
Respondent
Interveners including Alliance Québec and the Société franco‑manitobaine submitted alternative formulations of questions (Alliance Québec substituted and amended Manitoba's question 6) and argued for the Court's determination of the scope of s.23 as it applies to orders in council and incorporated instruments; parties argued the Court has jurisdiction and the matter should be heard, with interveners contesting the scope of continuation and remedies available.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Supreme Court of Canada (this judgment)

    The Supreme Court has jurisdiction to entertain and decide the reference questions and to control its procedure

  2. 02

    Manitoba Act, 1870 s.23; Constitution Act, 1867 s.133

    Languages guarantees in s.23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870 and s.133 of the Constitution Act, 1867 impose requirements on the enactment and publication of Manitoba laws

  3. 03

    Order of this Court dated November 4, 1985, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 347 and this order

    The Court may, in the exercise of its discretion, continue the temporary validity of impugned laws or measures pending final determination to avoid legal vacuum

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Court has jurisdiction to hear the parties' constitutional questions; it will hear the matters put forward (substituting Alliance Québec's amended question for Manitoba's question 6) and, in the exercise of its discretion, it ordered that the prior continuation of temporary validity of Manitoba laws be further continued but limited only to the matters raised in this application until the hearing and judgment.

Obiter and limits

  • Parties are referred to the Chief Justice's Chambers to set a hearing date
  • The rota judge is authorized to settle ancillary procedural matters within Chambers' jurisdiction as they arise
  • The order must be served on all Attorneys General

Court disposition

Application inscribed for hearing; temporary validity of Manitoba laws continued only as to matters raised in the application until hearing and judgment; question 6 of Manitoba replaced by Alliance Québec's amended question and the specified constitutional questions to be addressed at hearing

  • Inscribe the submitted constitutional questions for hearing (with Alliance Québec's amended question substituted for Manitoba's question 6)
  • Continue the order of November 4, 1985 ([1985] 2 S.C.R. 347) as regards the temporary validity of laws but only in relation to matters raised in this application until the hearing and judgment, subject to any further order of this Court
  • Refer the parties to the Chief Justice's Chambers to set a hearing date
  • Authorize the rota judge to settle other procedural matters within Chambers' jurisdiction
  • Serve this order upon all Attorneys General

Source and reliance status

Supreme Court of Canada · 7 December 1990

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Supreme Court of Canada

Judgment· 7 December 1990

[1990] 3 SCR 1417

Re Manitoba Language Rights Order Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1990-12-07 Report [1990] 3 SCR 1417 Case number 18606 Judges Lamer, Antonio; La Forest, Gérard V.; L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; Cory, Peter deCarteret; McLachlin, Beverley; Stevenson, William On appeal from Manitoba Subjects Constitutional law Notes SCC Case Information: 18606 Decision Content Re Manitoba Language Rights Order, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1417 IN THE MATTER OF a Reference by the Governor in Council concerning certain language rights under Section 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870, and Section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867 , set out in Order‑in‑Council P.C. 1984‑1136 dated the 5th day of April 1984 File No.: 18606. 1990: December 7. Present: Lamer C.J. and La Forest, L'Heureux‑Dubé, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin and Stevenson JJ. order for special hearing Constitutional law ‑‑ Language guarantees ‑‑ Hearing to be held to determine certain constitutional questions arising from Supreme Court's order establishing minimum time period necessary for the translation, re‑enactment, printing and publishing of Manitoba laws ‑‑ Temporary validity of laws of Manitoba continued until judgment rendered but only as regards the matters raised in application. ORDER to inscribe for hearing certain constitutional questions which arise from the order of this Court dated November 4, 1985, [1985] 2 S.C.R.

347. Donna J. Miller and Deborah Carlson, for the Attorney General of Manitoba. Michel Bastarache and Antoine F. Hacault, for the Société franco‑manitobaine. Vaughan L. Baird, Q.C., for Roger Bilodeau. François Dumaine, for the Fédération des francophones hors Québec. Stephen A. Scott and Victoria Percival‑Hilton, for Alliance Québec. D. Martin Low, Q.C., and Warren J. Newman, for the Attorney General of Canada. //Lamer C.J.// The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by LAMER C.J. ‑‑ We are all of the view that this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this application to hold a hearing and determine the questions submitted to us by the parties. We are of the view that, in the exercise of our discretion, we should hear this matter and address the questions put to us by Manitoba save question number 6; in the exercise of our discretion we will in the stead address the question put to us by Alliance Quebec in substitution to Manitoba's question number 6, as amended in accordance with the submission of the Société franco‑manitobaine. The question reads as follows: 6.(a) If the obligations of the Province of Manitoba pursuant to s. 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870 are more extensive than its practice, can the period of temporary validity established pursuant to the Order of this Court dated November 4, 1985, be extended, or a further period be established, to cover the orders in

council, instruments or documents in question, as well as the rights, obligations and legal effect thereof, in order to allow the Province to conform to its constitutional obligations? (b) Can such orders in council, instruments or documents, as well as the rights, obligations and legal effect thereof, if invalid, be rendered valid retroactively, and if so by what means? We refer the parties to the Chief Justice's Chambers for setting down a date for hearing, and to the rota judge to settle all other procedural matters within Chamber's jurisdiction, as they arise. We order that the order as regards the continuation of the temporary validity of laws referred to in paragraph 2(a) of the order of this Court reported at [1985] 2 S.C.R. 347, at p. 349, be further continued, but only as regards the matters raised in this application*, until the hearing has been held and judgment has been handed down, subject to any order of this Court. This order is to be served upon all Attorneys General. Order accordingly. Solicitor for the Attorney General of Manitoba: The Attorney General of Manitoba, Winnipeg. Solicitors for the Société franco‑manitobaine: Michel Bastarache, Ottawa; Thompson, Dorfman, Sweatman, Winnipeg. Solicitors for Roger Bilodeau: Newman MacLean, Winnipeg. Solicitor for the Fédération des francophones hors Québec: François Dumaine, Ottawa. Solicitors for Alliance Québec:

Stephen A. Scott and Victoria Percival‑Hilton, Montréal. Solicitor for the Attorney General of Canada: John C. Tait, Ottawa. * The following constitutional questions were submitted to the Court: 1.Are any or all of the types of orders in council described below, and listed in the materials provided in the casebook or orders in council similar in character thereto, subject to: (i) s. 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870; (ii) the first paragraph of the Order of this Court dated November 4, 1985? (a) Orders in council establishing government departments, health and social services district boards and committees of cabinet; (b) Orders in council authorizing a Minister or a Crown corporation to enter into a contract; (c) Orders in council authorizing the issuing of grants to municipalities or community groups; (d) Orders in council relating to appointments and, in particular: (i) appointing judges and members of quasi‑judicial tribunals; and (ii) appointing persons to positions in the civil service or to Crown corporations. (e) Orders in council affecting the rights or responsibilities of a specific person or persons, such as the issuing of a licence or permit to such person or persons. 2.Are any or all of the types of instruments or documents described below, and listed in the materials provided in the casebook or instruments or documents similar in character thereto, subject to: (i) s.

23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870; (ii) the first paragraph of the Order of this Court dated November 4, 1985? (a) Contracts attached to orders in council authorizing a Minister or a Crown corporation to enter into that contract; (b) Schedules attached to orders in council authorizing grants to municipalities or community groups and: (i) setting the terms and conditions on which those grants are to be made; or (ii) listing the recipient groups. (c) Schedules attached to orders in council described in question 1(e). 3.If the answer to either the first question or the second question is affirmative with respect to any or all of the types of orders in council, or instruments or documents described therein, what principles or criteria apply to determine the extent to which orders in council, or instruments or documents described therein, are subject to s. 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870? 4.Are any or all of the types of instruments or documents described below, and listed in the materials provided in the casebook or instruments or documents similar in character thereto, subject to: (i) s. 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870; or (ii) the first paragraph of the Order of this Court dated November 4, 1985? (a) Instruments or documents created by non‑governmental organisations or persons and incorporated by reference in the laws of Manitoba; (b) Instruments or documents created by governments other

than that of the Province of Manitoba, including departments, boards and agencies of such governments, and incorporated by reference in the laws of Manitoba; (c) Instruments or documents created by international organizations or persons and incorporated by reference in the laws of Manitoba; (d) Instruments or documents created by departments, boards and agencies of the government of the Province of Manitoba and incorporated by reference in the laws* of Manitoba. 5.If the answer to the fourth question is affirmative with respect to any or all of the types of instruments or documents described therein, what principles or criteria apply to determine the extent to which these instruments or documents are subject to s. 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870? 6.(a) If the obligations of the Province of Manitoba pursuant to s. 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870 are more extensive than its practice, can the period of temporary validity established pursuant to the Order of this Court dated November 4, 1985, be extended, or a further period be established, to cover the orders in council, instruments or documents in question, as well as the rights, obligations and legal effects thereof, in order to allow the Province to conform to its constitutional obligations? (b) Can such orders in council, instruments or documents, as well as the rights, obligations and legal effects thereof, if invalid, be rendered valid retroactively, and if so by what means? * See Erratum, [1991] 1 S.C.R. iv

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Reference re Manitoba Language Rights, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 347

Case cited

Re Manitoba Language Rights Order, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 1417

Case cited

Manitoba Act, 1870 s.23

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Constitution Act, 1867 s.133

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.