Case information

Charter of Rights — Freedom of association — Whether intermediate resources and family type resources, even though characterized as service providers, must have full benefit of freedom of association guaranteed by s. 2(d) of Canadian Charter of Rights and s. 3 of Charter of human rights and freedoms, including right to bargain collectively, right to strike and, failing this, access to meaningful dispute resolution mechanism — Whether legislature’s characterization of intermediate resources and family-type resources as service providers cannot have effect of depriving them of right to constitutional protection of collective bargaining, strike or access to meaningful dispute resolution process — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 2(d).

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.

Three groups of applicants brought applications challenging the constitutionality and validity of sections of the Act respecting the representation of family type resources and certain intermediate resources and the negotiation process for their group agreements (“ARR”). They alleged that the impugned provisions of the ARR infringe the freedom of association guaranteed to them by s. 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”) and s. 3 of the Charter of human rights and freedoms (“Quebec Charter”).

The Superior Court found that ss. 46 and 53 of the ARR infringe the freedom of association of intermediate resources and family type resources, a right protected by s. 2(d) of the Charter and s. 3 of the Quebec Charter, by depriving them of the right to strike without giving them access to a meaningful and effective dispute resolution mechanism. In so doing, the ARR substantially interferes with their right to bargain collectively with respect to their remuneration and other operating conditions, and this interference is not justified under s. 1 of the Charter or s. 9.1 of the Quebec Charter.

The Court of Appeal held that the service provider status of intermediate resources and family type resources does not permit them to aspire to the specific associational rights that s. 2(d) of the Charter and s. 3 of the Quebec Charter reserve for employees. The special conditions of intermediate resources and family type resources do not entitle them to be considered employees on an exceptional basis.