Thorson v. Attorney General of Canada

Thorson v. Attorney General of Canada

Majority held the Court has discretion to permit a federal taxpayer class action to challenge the constitutionality of federal legislation where the question is justiciable and the Attorney General has declined to act, and therefore the appellant had standing to proceed to the merits regarding the Official Languages Act.

Citation
[1975] 1 SCR 138
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: Joseph Thorarinn Thorson; Respondent / Defendant: Attorney General of Canada; Respondent / Defendant: Secretary of State of Canada; Respondent / Defendant: Receiver General of Canada; Respondent / Defendant: Keith Spicer; Respondent / Defendant: The Bilingual Districts Advisory Board; Respondent / Defendant: Roger Duhamel; Respondent / Defendant: Paul Fox; Respondent / Defendant: Roger St. Denis
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 January 1974
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Challenge (taxpayer Class Action) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada on Preliminary Standing; Judgment on Whether Appellant May Proceed to Merits
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgments below set aside; appellant permitted to proceed to have the constitutionality of the Official Languages Act adjudicated on the merits
Legal Topics
Standing of Taxpayers, Justiciability, Official Languages Act, Appropriation Acts, Judicial Discretion
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Public Law Class Actions Language Law Standing of Taxpayers Justiciability Official Languages Act +2 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Thorarinn Thorson

Appellant / Plaintiff

Attorney General of Canada

Respondent / Defendant

Secretary of State of Canada

Respondent / Defendant

Receiver General of Canada

Respondent / Defendant

Keith Spicer

Respondent / Defendant

The Bilingual Districts Advisory Board

Respondent / Defendant

Roger Duhamel

Respondent / Defendant

Paul Fox

Respondent / Defendant

Roger St. Denis

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Challenge (taxpayer Class Action) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada on Preliminary Standing; Judgment on Whether Appellant May Proceed to Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a federal taxpayer has standing to bring a class action to challenge the constitutionality of federal legislation
  2. 2 Whether a private plaintiff may proceed where the Attorney General has declined to challenge federal legislation
  3. 3 Whether municipal ratepayer standing principles (MacIlreith) extend to federal taxpayer suits

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held the Court has discretion to permit a federal taxpayer class action to challenge the constitutionality of federal legislation where the question is justiciable and the Attorney General has declined to act, and therefore the appellant had standing to proceed to the merits regarding the Official Languages Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgments below set aside; appellant permitted to proceed to have the constitutionality of the Official Languages Act adjudicated on the merits

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Judgments of the Ontario courts set aside