Ruck v. Mississauga (City)
Section 109 of the Courts of Justice Act mandates notice to the federal and provincial Attorneys General when constitutional issues are raised; failure to comply renders the Superior Court order invalid and requires rehearing with proper notice.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2025 ONCA 147
- Parties
- Applicant/appellant: Wolf Ruck; Respondent: The City of Mississauga; Intervenor: Canadian Constitution Foundation
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 26 February 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal to Court of Appeal; Oral Reasons Released; Matter Remitted for Rehearing
- Outcome
- Order of the Superior Court set aside and matter remitted for rehearing before a judge of the Superior Court of Justice with proper notice to the Federal and Provincial Attorneys General
- Legal Topics
- Notice to Attorneys General, Section 109 Courts of Justice Act, Constitutional Questions, Rehearing
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Wolf Ruck
Applicant/appellant
The City of Mississauga
Respondent
Canadian Constitution Foundation
Intervenor
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Court of Appeal; Oral Reasons Released; Matter Remitted for Rehearing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether s.109 of the Courts of Justice Act requires notice to the federal and provincial Attorneys General when a constitutional issue is raised
- 2 Whether the Superior Court order is valid if s.109 requirements were not complied with
Ratio Decidendi
Section 109 of the Courts of Justice Act mandates notice to the federal and provincial Attorneys General when constitutional issues are raised; failure to comply renders the Superior Court order invalid and requires rehearing with proper notice.
Court Disposition
Order of the Superior Court set aside and matter remitted for rehearing before a judge of the Superior Court of Justice with proper notice to the Federal and Provincial Attorneys General
Orders
- Set aside the order of Justice William M. LeMay dated May 2, 2024.
- Remit the matter for rehearing before a judge of the Superior Court of Justice with proper notice to the Federal and Provincial Attorneys General.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Ruck v. Mississauga (City) Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2025-02-26 Neutral citation 2025 ONCA 147 Docket numbers COA-24-CV-0540 Judges Nordheimer, Ian V.B.; Gomery, Sally A.; Dawe, Jonathan Subject Civil Decision Content COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: Ruck v. Mississauga (City), 2025 ONCA 147 DATE: 20250226 DOCKET: COA-24-CV-0540 Nordheimer, Gomery and Dawe JJ.A. BETWEEN Wolf Ruck Applicant (Appellant) and The City of Mississauga Respondent (Respondent) Wolf Ruck, acting in person Daron Earthy, for the respondent John Mather and Lauren Baker, for the intervenor, Canadian Constitution Foundation Heard and released orally: February 24, 2025 On appeal from the judgment of Justice William M. LeMay of the Superior Court of Justice, dated May 2, 2024. REASONS FOR DECISION [1] It is our view that s. 109 of the Courts of Justice Act had to be complied with. Both Attorneys General were entitled to notice of the constitutional issue, to file evidence and to make submissions, if they chose to do so. The requirements of the section are mandatory. In light of that, we are compelled to set aside the order below, and if Mr. Ruck wishes to pursue the matter, it must be reheard before a judge of the Superior Court of Justice on proper notice to the Federal and Provincial Attorneys General. No order as to costs. “I.V.B. Nordheimer J.A.” “S. Gomery J.A.” “J. Dawe J.A.”