Case information

Charter of Rights — Right to equality — Civil procedure — Class actions — Certification —Motion for certification — Are distinctions based on birth outside of Canada based on an enumerated or analogous ground under s. 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? — How should courts apply the principles against partial discrimination and adverse-impact discrimination under the grounds of national origin, citizenship, or other analogous grounds under s. 15(1) of the Charter? — When is it appropriate to dismiss claims under s. 15(1) of the Charter on a pleadings motion, without the benefit of any evidence?

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

The Federal Court granted the respondent’s motion to strike out, without leave to amend, the applicants’ statement of claim challenging the constitutionality of certain fees charged to individuals who apply for either permanent resident status in Canada or Canadian citizenship. The applicants asserted in their statement of claim that the levying of such fees violates s. 15(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as they only apply to “non-Canadian born” individuals, and as they discriminate against such individuals on the basis of their national or ethnic origin. The Federal Court accepted that the statement of claim identified two groups of individuals required to pay the fees in question, who were thus treated differently than others. However, the court concluded that the basis for any differential treatment was neither an enumerated nor analogous ground of discrimination for the purposes of s. 15. It was therefore plain and obvious that the claim was bound to fail. The Federal Court also dismissed the applicants’ motion to certify the action as a class proceeding, again on the basis that the statement of claim failed to disclose a reasonable cause of action.

The Federal Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the applicants’ appeal. It concluded that the applicants’ statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action and that the Federal Court did not err in denying leave to amend the statement of claim. The Federal Court also did not err in failing to consider the other four criteria for the certification of class actions.