Leila J. Gosselin

The City of Calgary enacted a bylaw freezing the number of taxi plate licences.

The respondents challenged the bylaw, arguing it was ultra vires the City under the new Municipal Government Act.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the standard of review for a municipality delineating its jurisdiction is correctness.

Applying a broad and purposive approach to interpreting municipal legislation, the Court found that the Act granted the City the power to limit the number of taxi plate licences.

The appeal was allowed and the bylaw was upheld.

The appellants challenged a Court of Appeal decision setting aside an arbitration award that had characterized a drastic reduction in scheduled hours, despite largely unchanged actual hours through call-ins, as a constructive layoff.

The Supreme Court majority held that the applicable standard of review was patent unreasonableness because the arbitration board was interpreting a collective agreement within its specialized jurisdiction under a near-privative clause.

The majority concluded that layoff in labour law requires a denial or cessation of work, and that the board patently unreasonably expanded the concept by treating scheduling changes without an actual reduction in hours as a layoff.

The majority further held that the board imposed a remedy not rationally connected to the breach alleged under the collective agreement.

The appeal was dismissed, with a dissent that would have restored the arbitration award.

The appellant employee's hours of work were gradually reduced when her department was reorganized and combined with another.

While her hours were reduced, junior staff from the other department were assigned tasks normally performed by her department.

A labour arbitration board allowed her grievance, finding the reduction in hours amounted to a constructive layoff in breach of the collective agreement.

The Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the employer's application for judicial review, but the Court of Appeal allowed it.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, holding that the arbitration board's decision was not patently unreasonable, as a significant reduction in hours where a particular employee is singled out may amount to a constructive layoff.