Majority
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
Dickson C.J.
The Chief Justice ‑‑ We are all of the view that this appeal succeeds. The judgment of the Court will be delivered by Justice Wilson.
Wilson J.
Wilson J. ‑‑ The members of the Court are all of the view that the test laid down in Attorney General of Canada v. Inuit Tapirisat of Canada, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 735, for striking out a statement of claim is not met in this case. It cannot be said that the outcome of the case is "plain and obvious" or "beyond doubt".
Issues as to the proper interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Manitoba Act, 1870 and the Constitution Act, 1871 and the effect of the impugned ancillary legislation upon them would appear to be better determined at trial where a proper factual base can be laid.
The Court is of the view also that the subject matter of the dispute, inasmuch as it involves the constitutionality of legislation ancillary to the Manitoba Act, 1870 is justiciable in the courts and that declaratory relief may be granted in the discretion of the court in aid of extra‑judicial claims in an appropriate case.
We see no reason, therefore, why the action should not proceed to trial. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the order of the Court of Appeal striking out the appellants' claim against the Attorney General of Canada is set aside.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellants Dumont et al.: Thomas R. Burger, Vancouver.
Solicitors for the appellant the Native Council of Canada Inc.: Savino & Company, Winnipeg.
Solicitor for the respondent: John C. Tait, Ottawa.
Cases cited
- Att. Gen. of Can. v. Inuit Tapirisat et al. item-2561-1980-10-07
Statutes and regulations cited
-
Unresolved citations
- the Constitution