Deficient reasons

P.E.I. Court of Appeal sends lawsuit that alleged discrimination by school boards back to lower court

The P.E.I. Court of Appeal said a judge didn’t give sufficient reasons when he dismissed a statement of claim in a lawsuit that alleged discrimination involving two school boards.

The French Language School Board and the English Language School Board sought to have a statement of claim by Noel Ayangma dismissed and in a recent unanimous decision, the court of appeal sent the motion back to the P.E.I. Supreme Court.

Writing for the appeal court, Justice Michele Murphy wrote that the reasons for judgment don’t explain to the parties, the appeal court and the public that justice has been done.

“The reasons do not allow for meaningful appellate review,” she said.

Ayangma sued the school boards alleging they discriminated against him in their hiring for two senior positions.

Former P.E.I. Supreme Court Justice Ben Taylor heard the defendants’ motion to strike the claim on the grounds it was frivolous or vexatious or an abuse of process.

Taylor ruled the claim was frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process and didn’t disclose a reasonable cause of action.

Ayangma appealed that decision.

In allowing the appeal, Murphy wrote that Taylor’s decision was 10 pages long, of which eight were a “wholesale adoption” of the defendants’ motion record.

Murphy wrote the reasons for judgment weren’t a reliable basis for finding there was no reasonable cause of action.

“The reasons for judgment are deficient,” Murphy said.

With the successful appeal, the court ordered the defendants to pay $3,210 in costs to Ayangma.

It also ordered a further $1,134 in lost earnings upon receipt of written verification from his employer that he was absent from work and lost pay in the amount claimed.