Sask. Court of Appeal hears arguments on stayed lawsuit against private Christian school

https://www.ctvnews.ca/regina/article/sask-court-of-appeal-hears-arguments-on-stayed-lawsuit-against-private-christian-school/

A civil suit against a Saskatoon private school is in the province’s highest court after it was stayed last summer.

The group of 22 former students at Legacy Christian Academy – now called Mile Two Church and its associated private Christian school – first brought forward the litigation in August 2022 seeking $25 million in compensation alleging various forms of abuse they experienced while they attended the school.

In June 2025, Justice Rochelle Wempe stayed the application, ruling there was “abuse of process.” In her decision, she said the plaintiffs failed to “immediately” disclose settlement agreements with three defendants, which “significantly” altered the litigation landscape.

The plaintiffs filed the appeal shortly after.

On Thursday, counsels for the appellants and respondents were back in court making their arguments to Saskatchewan’s Court of Appeal.

The panel of three judges includes Chief Justice Robert Leurer, Justice Jerome Tholl, Justice Keith Kilback.

Grant Scharfstein, the lawyer representing the students, argued Justice Wempe erred in law by throwing out the suit on those grounds.

“A stay of proceedings is the ultimate remedy granted only in certain cases,” Scharfstein told the court. “And the abuse falls at the high end of the spectrum of seriousness.”

“Instead, the chambers judge opted to implement a rigid rule from Ontario which predetermined the remedy,” he added.

Scharfstein pointed to a series of case law which showed the court has the ability to exercise its discretion in more nuanced cases.

“The chambers judge rejected the plaintiff’s argument regarding the importance of the plea position,” he said. “The lack of defense is not determinative alone, it was the central factor to be considered given the pleadings are foundational documents setting up litigation landscape.”

Finally, the appellants said the stay failed the students their opportunity for justice.

“Staying this action has absolutely denied the appellants, and the entire proposed plaintiff class, of their day in court and their access to justice,” Scharfstein said.

Lawyers representing Mile Two Church argued the lower court did consider other remedies.

“The rationale underlining the rule is based on fairness, preserving integrity of the court process, and preventing the abuse of process,” Amanda Quayle countered. “It is a rule that applies across the board to all partial settlement agreements as prescribed timelines for disclosure.”

Quayle says she and her co-counsels requested several times to receive the disclosure of the settlement agreements but never did.

“Justice is a two-way street,” she told the court. “We asked them for [the agreements]: they told us to go pound sand.”

“This is not a small deal,” Crown co-counsel for the Government of Saskatchewan Justin Stevenson argued. “These are alleged co-conspirators that pleaded the settlement defendants committed egregious misconduct, in part in concert with the rest of us. Which, of course, we deny.”

The Government of Saskatchewan is also a respondent for the suit.

“If you enter into a settlement: disclose it,” Stevenson said.

Through their questioning the justices asked why the court should not exercise its depression to find other remedies.

“Are there any other circumstance in which there’s important procedural obligation beached that results in an automatic stay,” asked Chief Justice Leurer.

“Not in my experience,” responded Quayle.

Leurer and his colleagues reserved their decision on the appeal for a later date. A ruling is expected sometime in the coming months.