In this constitutional and procedural appeal concerning minority-language education litigation, the Court upheld the finding that trial-level conduct created a reasonable apprehension of bias and warranted a new trial on remitted issues.
The Court confirmed that, absent territorial delegation, a minority-language school board cannot unilaterally expand admissions beyond criteria set by valid regulation under s. 23 of the Charter.
The Court rejected treating a judge’s community affiliation alone as a sufficient basis for bias without stronger contextual evidence.
It further held that statutory language-rights claims under territorial legislation should proceed at the new trial on a full evidentiary record.
The appeal was largely dismissed, with no order as to costs.
