In Youngchief v The Attorney General of Canada, 2025 ABKB 35, Justice James T. Neilson of the Alberta Court of King’s Bench certified the class action against Canada, a Roman Catholic diocese that allegedly exercised control of the school and the board of the relevant school district.
The court, did, however, decline to certify the action against Alberta, finding that the claim did not disclose a cause of action against the province as the relevant legislation did not give Alberta the power to control or monitor the management or operation of schools.
Counsel for the plaintiff, Leighton Grey of Grey Wowk Spencer LLP, said he was hopeful that the decision would bring Canada to the table to negotiate a settlement.
“The class action itself relates to incidents that happened a very long time ago… and so many of these people are no longer living. Many of them died during COVID,” he said, adding that class members just wanted the case resolved.
Grey estimated that there are 350 to 500 surviving class members.
The plaintiff, Cynthia Iris Youngchief, submitted that Canada ceased operating its Indian Day School in Kehewin Cree Nation in 1964 and began transporting children from the First Nation to and from the nearby town of Bonnyville to attend the Notre Dame School.
Youngchief alleged that the class members — Aboriginal persons who attended the Notre Dame School between Sept. 1, 1966 and June 28, 1974 — were subjected to frequent physical, psychological, and sexual abuse.
The lawsuit alleges that Canada, Alberta, the Diocese of Saint-Paul, the St. Louis Parish and the Board of Trustees of Lakeland Roman Catholic Separate School Division and its predecessors were jointly and severally negligent and breached their fiduciary duty owed to the class members.
The claim alleges that Canada was responsible for the maintenance, funding, operation, oversight and/or management of Canadian schools for Aboriginal children, including Notre Dame school.
The plaintiff also alleges that Canada delegated its duties to Alberta under the School Act and the Department of Education Act, and that Alberta owed a duty of care to class members through its governance and support of Notre Dame school.
In addition, the lawsuit alleges that Alberta breached its duty to the class members, failing to take reasonable steps to prevent or stop physical, emotional, sexual and psychological harm at the school.
The plaintiff submitted that the Diocese of Saint-Paul and the St. Louis Parish owed a duty of care to class members through their support of Notre Dame school, and that they breached their duty in failing to ensure the class members were in a safe environment when under their care.
Youngchief also alleges that the defendant school district, the Board of Trustees of Lakeland Roman Catholic Separate School Division and its predecessors, breached their duty by failing to take reasonable steps to prevent or stop physical, emotional, sexual and psychological harm.
Canada consented to the certification of the class action while the diocesan defendants and the school district did not oppose the certification.
Alberta objected to the certification of claims against it, arguing that the pleadings do not disclose a cause of action against it and the claims of the class members did not raise a common issue involving Alberta.
Justice Neilson noted that the claim made explicit reference to the School Act and the Alberta Department of Education Act and that it was proper for the court to refer to the legislation in order to determine if a cause of action had been made out against Alberta.
The judge noted that both School Acts that were in place during the relevant period allowed for the establishment of school districts across the province and that each school district had a school board, which operated as an independent corporate entity, legally distinct from Alberta.
He further noted that school boards had the responsibility and power to suspend or dismiss teachers for gross misconduct and neglect of duty and to provide health services and safeguards to pupils.
The court concluded that the School Acts did not give Alberta the power to control or monitor the management or operation of schools, or deem the school boards or school staff to be agents of Alberta.
“[N]or do they give Alberta or responsible Minister the power to control the activities of the school board. Pursuant to the School Acts, these duties lie legally with the independent school board,” the judge wrote.
The judge held that the claim did not disclose a cause of action against Alberta in negligence or breach of fiduciary duty.
“The Plaintiff’s alleged breaches of duty may apply to the School District and its predecessors, but not to Alberta,” the judge wrote, certifying the class action against Canada, the diocesan defendants and the school district.
Counsel for Canada were Alethea LeBlanc, Colin LaRoche and Laura Klassen Russell of the Department of Justice Canada.
Counsel for Alberta were John-Marc Dube and Frances Chiu of Alberta Justice Civil Litigation.
Counsel for the Diocese of Saint-Paul and St. Louis Parish was C. Vincent Kurata of McCuaig Desrochers LLP.
Counsel for Lakeland Roman Catholic Separate School District #150 were Phillip Tinkler and Cristina Wendel of Dentons Canada LLP.
If you have any information, story ideas, or news tips for Law360 Canada on business-related law and litigation, including class actions, please contact Karunjit Singh at karunjit.singh@lexisnexis.ca or 905-415-5859.