FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2016)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 35 times | Saved to 12 briefcases
Re Canada Trust Co and Ontario Human Rights Commission (1990), 69 DLR (4th) 321 (Ont CA).

Facts:

Charitable trust established to give scholarships to white protestants and not Jews, people of colour, Catholics, etc. because White Protestants "carry civilization on their shoulders".

Issue(s):

(1) Do these restrictions violate the public benefit requirement of charitable trusts?
(2) Is it sufficiently certain?
(3) Is it contrary to public policy?

Ratio:

(1) Racist provisions qualify for public benefit

(2) They are sufficiently certain because we can identify who qualifies

(3) Clearly contrary to public policy.

Analysis:

(1) It's a sufficiently large group to qualify for public benefit.
(2) This is a precedent condition, so it is sufficient if just some qualify for it. (Jones v T. Eaton Co; McPhail v Doulton)
-The scholarship has been applied for decades without problem.
(3) Public policy is derived from many sources (law, speeches, etc.) (Christie v York Corp.; Re Noble and Wolf; Drummon Wren)
-Human rights legislation across the country is evidence of public policy.

Holding:

OHRC won. Trust defeated.

Comments:

The Court very careful to limit this decision to PUBLIC associations, such as charities.


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.