Harry Glinter

The respondent, a recipient of social assistance in Manitoba, challenged the province's practice of making deductions from his monthly allowance to recover past overpayments, arguing it violated the federal Canada Assistance Plan (CAP).

He also challenged Manitoba's practice of allowing municipalities to set their own social assistance rates.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that CAP requires provinces to provide assistance in an amount compatible with an individual's basic requirements, but does not prohibit the recovery of overpayments, provided such deductions do not cause undue hardship.

The Court also held that CAP permits municipalities to set assistance rates, provided the province establishes the criteria for determining persons in need.

The appeal by the federal government was allowed.

The respondent, a person in need receiving provincial social allowance, sought a declaration and injunction against federal cost-sharing payments to Manitoba under the Canada Assistance Plan, alleging provincial non-compliance with the Plan's conditions.

The appellants moved to strike the statement of claim for lack of standing and failure to disclose a reasonable cause of action.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that while the respondent lacked a direct personal interest, he should be granted public interest standing to challenge the statutory authority for the federal payments.

The Court extended the public interest standing principles from constitutional cases to non-constitutional challenges of administrative action.

The appeal was dismissed, allowing the action to proceed.