2 total
State-sponsored council prayer breached neutrality and discriminated against non-belief.
On a statutory appeal from a specialized human rights tribunal, the Court held that judicial review standards apply, with correctness for the scope of state religious neutrality and reasonableness for most discrimination and evidentiary determinations.
The municipal council prayer, viewed in context, was found to be a religious practice by a public authority that breached the state’s duty of neutrality.
The practice created discriminatory interference with freedom of conscience and religion that was more than trivial or insubstantial.
The by-law attempting to regulate the prayer could be declared inoperative in relation to the complainant, and the remedial orders and damages were largely upheld subject to limits on the tribunal’s power to issue a general invalidity declaration.
The appeal was allowed.
Intervener authorized to file objection to leave application where respondents declined to contest.
Françoise Nadon, an intervener in the lower courts representing a class action group seeking ragweed eradication, brought a motion to be substituted or added as a party to contest an application for leave to appeal filed by Canadian Pacific Limited and others.
The respondents, including various municipalities, did not intend to contest the leave application.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that while a private party cannot substitute itself for municipal bodies, Nadon's participation was necessary to fully inform the Court.
The motion was granted in part, authorizing Nadon to file an objection to the application for leave as if she were a respondent.
