Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: CV-18-590584

DATE: 20210520

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: WORKING FAMILIES ONTARIO, PATRICK DILLON, PETER MACDONALD, THE ELEMENTARY TEACHERS’ FEDERATION OF ONTARIO, FELIPE PAREJA, THE ONTARIO ENGLISH CATHOLIC TEACHERS’ ASSOCIATION AND ON BEHALF OF THE MEMBERS OF THE ONTARIO ENGLISH CATHOLIC TEACHERS’ ASSOCIATION, THE ONTARIO SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS’ FEDERATION AND LESLIE WOLFE, Applicants

– and –

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO and THE CHIEF ELECTORAL OFFICER OF ONTARIO, Respondents

– and –

THE CANADIAN CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION, Intervenor

BEFORE: E.M. Morgan, J.

COUNSEL: Paul Cavalluzzo, Susan Ursel, Howard Goldblatt, Tyler Boggs, Adrien Telford, Kristen Allen, Natasha Abraham, Christopher Perri, Christine Davies, Daniel Sheppard, for the Applicants

Yashoda Ranganathan and David Tortell, for the Respondent, Attorney General

Brian Gover and Stephen Aylward, for the Respondent, Chief Electoral Officer

Colin Feasby, Lindsay Rauccio, Graham Buitenhuis, Stephen Armstrong, for the Intervenor

HEARD: Request in writing

direction Re Factums

[1] Counsel for the Applicants have corresponded with me requesting leave for each set of Applicants to file factums that are more than the 30 pages prescribed by the applicable Practice Direction. They have suggested that in a constitutional Application such as this it will be helpful to the Court to have more detailed and thorough written submissions.

[2] Counsel for the Attorney General does not agree with this proposal. They have indicated in their own correspondence with me that they are satisfied to produce a 30-page responding factum addressing the combined Application.

[3] I of course appreciate the Applicants’ offer of helpfulness. But I am of the view that more help is not always better help.

[4] The 30-page policy is a serious one. “Leave is exceptional and granted sparingly in special circumstances”: Saint John (City) v. Saint John Firefighters’ Association (2010), 2010 CanLII 39428 (NB CA), 362 NBR (2d) 327, at paras 12-13 (NB CA). As the Ontario Court of Appeal observed in OZ Merchandising Inc. v. Canadian Professional Soccer League Inc., 2020 ONCA 532, at para. 4, “[t]he purpose of the 30-page limit is to focus counsel on the issues...” I am not alone among the judiciary in preferring focused and precise over detailed and lengthy.

[5] In weighing a request such as this I will take a cue from philosopher Blaise Pascal or author Mark Twain or whoever else the Internet deigns to credit with the relevant quote. If there were very little time to produce the factums I might allow them to be more lengthy. But since there is still a week before the Applicants’ factums are due, counsel should have enough time to produce shorter versions.

[6] All parties are to adhere to the 30-page limit, except for the Intervenor CCLA whose submissions have already been limited to 20 pages.

Morgan J.

Date: May 20, 2021