## Facts

- Francophone parents in Edmonton challenged the quality and governance of French-language education provided through English-dominated school boards.
- In 1982, parents asked Alberta’s Minister of Education to create a French-language elementary school administered by parents within an autonomous francophone board; the Minister declined and directed them to work through the local public board, which refused.
- The parents opened a private French-language school and, in 1983, filed a constitutional challenge alleging Alberta’s school governance scheme violated minority-language education rights under Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms § 23.
- During litigation, a francophone school program was established under a separate (Catholic) board, but francophone parents were given only an advisory role rather than decision-making authority.
- The dispute centered on whether § 23 guarantees not only French-language instruction, but also minority-community “management and control” over the facilities and instruction.

## Issues

1. Whether Canadian Charter § 23 includes a right to minority-language “management and control” over educational facilities and instruction, and how that content varies “where numbers warrant.”
2. Whether the number of eligible francophone students in Edmonton was sufficient to require governance powers beyond advisory participation.
3. Whether Alberta’s School Act and French Language Regulation violated § 23 and, if so, whether any violation was justified under Canadian Charter § 1.
4. Whether denominational school protections under Constitution Act, 1867 § 93 and Alberta Act § 17 limit or bar the governance remedies required by § 23.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and held that § 23 confers a substantive right to minority-language management and control, with scope determined on a numbers-based “sliding scale.”
- The Court held that Edmonton’s numbers warranted significant minority representation on existing boards with real, exclusive decision-making authority over key aspects of the minority-language program (not merely advisory input).
- The Court found Alberta’s French Language Regulation unconstitutional because it failed to provide the required level of minority management and control; the infringement was not saved by § 1.
- The Court held that implementing § 23 governance rights is compatible with denominational school guarantees because the required changes concern language rather than religion.

## Legal Principles

- Canadian Charter § 23 is remedial and purposive, aimed at preserving official-language minority communities and their cultures through minority-language education “where numbers warrant.”
- Effective minority-language education under § 23 requires minority-community management and control to ensure facilities and instruction reflect minority language and culture.
- The degree of management and control required is determined by a “sliding scale” tied to the number of eligible students; remedies may range from delegated decision-making representation on existing boards to a separate minority-language school board where numbers justify it.
- Advisory or consultative committees, without exclusive authority over defined areas, do not satisfy § 23’s requirement of meaningful management and control.
- Denominational school rights do not operate as a categorical limit on § 23 language-governance remedies when the changes affect language governance rather than religious rights.

## Conclusion

The Court interpreted Canadian Charter § 23 to include enforceable minority-language governance rights and required Alberta to provide Edmonton’s francophone parents meaningful decision-making authority over French-language schooling, holding that purely advisory structures were unconstitutional and unjustified.


Mahe v. Alberta, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 342 (Can.)