http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0b84577c-6c04-4259-af99-669a0ca6e41a
Disfellowshipping is Hard to Do
On April 13, 2017 the Supreme Court of Canada granted, to the Judicial Committee of the Highwood Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Highwood Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, leave to appeal the Alberta Court of Appeal’s decision on the availability of judicial review over their disfellowshipping of Mr. Randy Wall.
As assessed by my colleague Adam Aptowitzer in one of our earlier newsletters, the appeal court’s decision is of interest to “other Church and religious organizations that must discipline their members and now must worry that the Courts will reach in and review those decisions.” He stressed the importance that “decisions to discipline members be taken with utmost regard for the traditional concept of procedural fairness and a consultation with a lawyer that can advise them of these issues.”
Let’s revisit the facts. Mr. Wall is a real estate agent whose episodes of drunkenness (including a consequent instance of verbal abuse of his wife)—or rather, his insufficient repentance for these episodes (as deemed by the elders of the Highwood Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses)—brought about his disfellowshipping from the congregation. Disfellowshipping, in this case, involved Mr. Wall not only not being admitted to the congregation’s services, but also being officially shunned by other members. Wall’s shunning further impacted his relations with family members, and also, he alleged, his business prospects.
The Alberta Court of Appeal majority decision ruled that the courts had jurisdiction to review the Congregation’s Appeal Committee’s decision, and that the assessment of any economic loss incurred by Wall due to the disfellowshipping could be made by on the eventual application for judicial review.
The Highwood Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC). On the SCC website, the case summary[1] prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch) points to the issues to be argued:
READ MORE: http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0b84577c-6c04-4259-af99-669a0ca6e41a