Beyond Review: Supreme Court Of Canada Confirms Courts Are Unlikely To Interfere With Voluntary Associations

• Published date: 01 June 2021
• Subject Matter: Corporate/Commercial Law, Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Contracts and Commercial Law, Trials & Appeals & Compensation
• Law Firm: Bennett Jones LLP
• Author: Mr Ranjan Agarwal, Dylan Gibbs and Dylan Murray

In Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Canada St. Mary Cathedral v Aga, 2021 SCC 22 [Ethiopian Orthodox] the Supreme Court of Canada elaborated on the circumstances in which courts will intervene in the affairs of voluntary associations, including religious congregations. To enforce the rules of a voluntary association, or hold the association to standards of procedural fairness, a court must conclude that the plaintiff's claim depends on an established legal right such as a contract. That is true even if the association maintains written bylaws or a constitution.

In this case, the Court ruled that mere membership in a voluntary association with governing rules does not automatically create contractual rights against the association. While voluntary associations with constitutions and bylaws may be constituted by contract, that is a determination that must be made based on general contractual principles. Specifically, the parties must objectively intend to enter into contractual relations, which'as a result of the Court's decision'will be difficult to establish in a religious context.

Background

The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church of Canada St. Mary Cathedral is a corporation under the Corporations Act, RSO 1990, c C.38.

The Church's congregation is an unincorporated association. Members of the congregation must complete and submit an application form. The Church's constitution and bylaws permit it to cancel memberships.

In 2016, several members of the congregation were appointed to a committee to investigate a movement that some within the Church considered heretical. The committee produced a report with its findings and recommendations, which were to be reviewed and considered by the Archbishop of the Church. The Archbishop declined to implement the committee's findings, which led five members of the committee to express their dissatisfaction with this decision. The members continued their criticism and were consequently removed from the congregation.

The five expelled members sued the Church alleging that their expulsions violated the principles of natural justice because the Church did not provide the members with written reasons for their expulsions, a chance to respond, or any internal mechanism for an appeal. They also argued that their expulsions did not comply with the Church's own bylaws and constitution.

The Church brought a motion for summary judgment for dismissal of the claims. The Church argued that, as a voluntary association, the...