Benoit Boucher

A private Catholic high school challenged the Minister’s refusal to exempt its proposed alternative ethics and religious culture program.

The Court held that requiring Loyola to teach Catholicism and Catholic ethics from a neutral perspective disproportionately limited religious freedom.

It allowed the appeal, set aside the Minister’s decision, and remitted the matter for reconsideration.

The Court also held that teaching about other religions and their ethics could still be required in a neutral and respectful manner.

Parents challenged a school board refusal to exempt their children from Quebec's mandatory Ethics and Religious Culture course, alleging violations of religious freedom and improper external influence.

The Court held that sincere belief alone is insufficient, and objective proof of interference is required.

On this record, the parents failed to prove the program infringed freedom of religion, and the refusal to exempt was upheld.

The appellant appealed a decision declaring s. 144 of the Act respecting industrial accidents and occupational diseases inoperative in relation to a requirement to pay issued under s. 126(4) of the Employment Insurance Act.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, finding a conflict of legislative purposes between the federal provision, which aims to recover overpayments summarily without regard to provincial exemptions, and the provincial provision exempting income replacement benefits from seizure.

The provincial provision was held to be constitutionally inoperative under the doctrine of federal paramountcy.