Caso Multani

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 256, 2006 SCC 6
BETWEEN:

DATE: 20060302 DOCKET: 30322

Balvir Singh Multani and Balvir Singh Multani, in his capacity as tutor to his minor son Gurbaj Singh Multani Appellants v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys and Attorney General of Quebec Respondents - and World SikhOrganization of Canada, Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Canadian Human Rights Commission and Ontario Human Rights Commission Interveners OFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION CORAM: McLachlin C.J. and Major,* Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: (paras. 1 to 83) JOINT CONCURRING REASONS: (paras. 84 to 139) CONCURRING REASONS: (paras. 140 to 155) Charron J.(McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, Binnie and Fish JJ. concurring) Deschamps and Abella JJ.

LeBel J.

* Major J. took no part in the judgment.

______________________________

Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 256, 2006 SCC 6

Balvir Singh Multani and Balvir Singh Multani, in his capacity as tutor to his minor son Gurbaj Singh Multani

Appellants

v.Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys and Attorney General of Quebec

Respondents

and

World Sikh Organization of Canada, Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Canadian Human Rights Commission and Ontario Human Rights Commission

Interveners

Indexed as: Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys

Neutral citation: 2006 SCC 6.

File No.: 30322.

2005: April 12; 2006:March 2.

Present: McLachlin C.J. and Major,* Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ.

*

Major J. took no part in the judgment.

-3on appeal from the court of appeal for quebec

Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Freedom of religion — Wearing of kirpan at school — Council of commissioners of school board prohibiting Sikh student from wearing kirpan toschool — Whether decision infringing freedom of religion guaranteed by s. 2(a) of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms — If so, whether infringement justifiable under s. 1 of Charter.

Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Reasonable limit — Law — Administrative decision — Infringement of guaranteed right resulting from decision of administrative body acting pursuant to its enablingstatute — Whether infringement limit prescribed by “law” within meaning of s. 1 of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Administrative law — Judicial review — Compliance of administrative decision with requirements of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms — Council of commissioners of school board prohibiting Sikh student from wearing kirpan to school — Whether decision infringing student’sfreedom of religion — Appropriate approach for reviewing decision — Relationship between administrative law and constitutional law.

G and his father B are orthodox Sikhs. G believes that his religion requires him to wear a kirpan at all times; a kirpan is a religious object that resembles a dagger and must be made of metal. In 2001, G accidentally dropped the kirpan he was wearing under hisclothes in the yard of the school he was attending. The school board sent G’s parents a letter in which, as a reasonable accommodation, it authorized their son to wear

-4his kirpan to school provided that he complied with certain conditions to ensure that it was sealed inside his clothing. G and his parents agreed to this arrangement. The governing board of the school refused to ratify the agreementon the basis that wearing a kirpan at the school violated art. 5 of the school’s Code de vie (code of conduct), which prohibited the carrying of weapons. The school board’s council of commissioners upheld that decision and notified G and his parents that a symbolic kirpan in the form of a pendant or one in another form made of a material rendering it harmless would be acceptable in the place of...