To support us, please follow us wherever you're listening and visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠our website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to provide feedback.

Administrative law — Judicial review — Discretionary administrative decisions engaging Charter protections — Charter values
Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Minority language educational rights

(00:00:16) Reasons for Judgment: Côté J. (Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Martin, Kasirer, Jamal and O’Bonsawin JJ. concurring)
(00:00:21) I. Overview – 1
(00:05:28) II. Background – 10
(00:12:34) A. Situation of the Appellant Parents – 23
(00:12:37) (1) A.B. (Mother of Child W.) – 23
(00:16:14) (2) F.A. (Mother of Child A.) – 29
(00:18:59) (3) T.B. (Father of Child V.) – 35
(00:20:44) (4) E.S. (Mother of Child E.) – 38
(00:21:40) (5) J.J. (Father of Children T. and N.) – 40
(00:23:28) III. Judicial History – 44
(00:23:31) A. Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories – 44
(00:24:55) B. Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories – 46
(00:26:53) C. Court of Appeal for the Northwest Territories – 50
(00:27:18) (1) Majority Reasons – 52
(00:28:39) (2) Concurring Reasons – 55
(00:29:43) IV. Issues – 58
(00:30:21) V. Analysis – 59
(00:30:52) A. Doré Framework – 60
(00:39:13) B. The Decisions Engage the Protections of Section 23 – 75
(00:39:17) (1) The Values Underlying Section 23 Are Relevant to the Exercise of the Minister’s Discretion – 75
(00:45:25) (2) The Minister’s Decisions Have the Effect of Limiting the Values Underlying Section 23 – 84
(00:50:23) C. The Minister Did Not Proportionately Balance the Values Underlying Section 23 With the Government’s Interests – 92
(00:59:27) D. It Is Neither Necessary nor Appropriate for This Court To Rule on the Allegation That the Right To Use French or the Right To Be Heard Was Infringed – 104
(01:05:14) VI. Disposition