than they waste court resources and delay legitimate cases from
being heard. In awarding elevated costs, the trial judge sought to
send a message that there are consequences to such behaviour. In
so doing, he was protecting access to justice, not eroding it.
[ 43] Finally, I see no error in the quantum of the costs awarded.
The trial judge did not rubber stamp Manulife’s bill of costs. He
reviewed it carefully and made a substantial reduction. There is
nothing to suggest that the quantum of costs awarded was
tainted by an error in principle or plainly wrong. There is, therefore, no basis for appellate intervention with it.
[ 44] I would dismiss the appeal. The parties may make written submissions regarding the costs of the appeal. Manulife
shall serve its costs submissions within ten days of the release of
these reasons. Mr. Alguire shall have ten days from the receipt
of Manulife’s costs submissions to respond. Manulife shall then
have five days to file reply submissions. All submissions shall be
filed within 30 days of the date of the release of these reasons.
Appeal and application dismissed.
E. T. v. Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board;
Christian Legal Fellowship et al., Intervenors
[Indexed as: T. (E.) v. Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board]
2017 ONCA 893
Court of Appeal for Ontario, Sharpe, Lauwers and B. W. Miller JJ.A.
November 22, 2017
Charter of Rights and Freedoms — Freedom of conscience and religion — Applicant’s children attending public elementary school —
Applicant asking school board to accommodate his Christian religious
beliefs by providing him with advance notice of any classroom instruction or discussion on certain issues so that he could decide whether or
not to withdraw his children from those classes or activities — Board
declining to provide requested accommodation because prior notification was not practical or possible — Applicant not establishing that
board’s refusal to provide accommodation substantially interfered with
his freedom of religion.
The applicant’s young children attended public elementary school. He was a
committed Christian, and asked the respondent school board to accommodate his
religious beliefs by providing him with advance notice of any classroom instruction or discussion on a list of topics, including “moral relativism”, “environmental
worship”, “instruction in sex education”, and portrayals of homosexual/bisexual