Congrégation des témoins de Jéhovah de St-Jérôme-Lafontaine v. Lafontaine (Village)
Encyclopedia
Congrégation des témoins de Jéhovah de St-Jérôme-Lafontaine v. Lafontaine, 2004 SCC 48, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada
decision in Canadian administrative law
. The case applied the Baker
framework for analysing the duty of fairness owed by an administrative decision-maker to a zoning request made to a municipality and found that the municipal government owed a duty of procedural fairness to the applicant in the way that it assessed and responded to their rezoning application.
de St-Jérôme-Lafontain ("the congregation") desired to build a place of worship in the village of Lafontaine, Quebec. According to the Act respecting land use planning and development, such a religious establishment must be on land with a "P-3" zoning designation. The congregation was not able to locate any suitable land for sale with such a designation. Consequently, the congregation entered into an agreement to purchase a plot of land with a different zoning, the sale being conditional on the municipality authorizing the re-zoning of the land. The municipality refused the request to re-zone the land after conducting an extensive study and providing detailed reasons for the decision, which primarily related to residential tax rates. The congregation responded to the municipality's decision by finding a different piece of land and again applied for rezoning of that land. The municipality then summarily denied that rezoning application, noting only that P-3 land was available elsewhere. When the congregation was again unable to find suitable land zoned P-3, after a four-year-long search, they applied for a third time to the municipality to rezone a piece of land which they could purchase. The municipality again summarily denied their application without providing reasons. At this point, the congregation turned to the courts to challenge the fairness of the municipality's decision.
. The court concluded that the municipality owed a duty of fairness to the congregation after assessing the five factors:
Specifically, the court ruled that the content of the duty of procedural fairness owed the congregation was that the municipality was required to carefully evaluate the congregation's applications for a zoning variance and to give reasons for refusing the applications.
Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeals in the Canadian justice system. The court grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts, and its decisions...
decision in Canadian administrative law
Canadian administrative law
Canadian administrative law is the body of law that addresses the actions and operations of governments and governmental agencies. That is, the law concerns the manner in which courts can review the decisions of administrative decision-makers such as a board, tribunal, commission, agency or minister...
. The case applied the Baker
Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Baker v. Canada , [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817 is a leading Canadian administrative law decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court provided guidance on the standard of judicial review of administrative decisions...
framework for analysing the duty of fairness owed by an administrative decision-maker to a zoning request made to a municipality and found that the municipal government owed a duty of procedural fairness to the applicant in the way that it assessed and responded to their rezoning application.
Facts
The Congrégation des témoins de JéhovahJehovah's Witnesses
Jehovah's Witnesses is a millenarian restorationist Christian denomination with nontrinitarian beliefs distinct from mainstream Christianity. The religion reports worldwide membership of over 7 million adherents involved in evangelism, convention attendance of over 12 million, and annual...
de St-Jérôme-Lafontain ("the congregation") desired to build a place of worship in the village of Lafontaine, Quebec. According to the Act respecting land use planning and development, such a religious establishment must be on land with a "P-3" zoning designation. The congregation was not able to locate any suitable land for sale with such a designation. Consequently, the congregation entered into an agreement to purchase a plot of land with a different zoning, the sale being conditional on the municipality authorizing the re-zoning of the land. The municipality refused the request to re-zone the land after conducting an extensive study and providing detailed reasons for the decision, which primarily related to residential tax rates. The congregation responded to the municipality's decision by finding a different piece of land and again applied for rezoning of that land. The municipality then summarily denied that rezoning application, noting only that P-3 land was available elsewhere. When the congregation was again unable to find suitable land zoned P-3, after a four-year-long search, they applied for a third time to the municipality to rezone a piece of land which they could purchase. The municipality again summarily denied their application without providing reasons. At this point, the congregation turned to the courts to challenge the fairness of the municipality's decision.
The Duty of the Municipality
In order to determine the duty that the municipality owed to the congregation, the court applied the five-part test from BakerBaker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Baker v. Canada , [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817 is a leading Canadian administrative law decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court provided guidance on the standard of judicial review of administrative decisions...
. The court concluded that the municipality owed a duty of fairness to the congregation after assessing the five factors:
- The nature of the decision and the decision-making process employed by the public organ
- The nature of the statutory scheme and the precise statutory provisions pursuant to which the public body operates
- The importance of the decision to the individuals affected
- The legitimate expectations of the party challenging the decision
- The nature of the deference accorded to the body
Specifically, the court ruled that the content of the duty of procedural fairness owed the congregation was that the municipality was required to carefully evaluate the congregation's applications for a zoning variance and to give reasons for refusing the applications.
Remedy
The court found that "the Municipality acted in a manner that was arbitrary and straddled the boundary separating good from bad faith." Accordingly, the court set aside the second and third rezoning refusals as they did not comply with the law. The court ordered the municipality to reconsider the congregation's application. The congregation had argued that such as a remedy was inadequate because it argued that the municipality was likely to again refuse the application, though with proper reasons. However, the court rejected this argument because it implies that the municipality was entitled to a particular substantive decision, instead of merely to a fair process. Additionally, the court was unable to conclude on the facts whether or not the municipality was acting in bad faith in denying the congregation's second and third rezoning applications.External links
- Full decision on LexUMLexUMLexum is a Canadian legal technologies firm, specializing in legal information management and search. The firm is a spin-off from the Université de Montréal LexUM Laboratory...