Court of Appeal kills bid to save Charlotte County courts

A bid by lawyers in Charlotte County to overturn the provincial government's closure of courts in St. Stephen and Grand Manan has been stopped by the province's highest court.

In a ruling released Thursday, the New Brunswick Court of Appeal ruled the Charlotte County Barristers' Society Inc. waited too long to seek a judicial review of the decision to close the courts.

AnearlierCourt of Queen's Bench ruling that allowed the case to proceed was set aside by the appeal court and the application for a judicial review was dismissed.

• Charlotte County lawyers launch legal action to stop court closures
• Charlotte lawyers remain hopeful courts will reopen
• St. Stephen courthouse closure prompts protest

The barristers' society was also ordered to pay $6,000 in costs to the province.

It was announced in the budget speech on March 31, 2015 that the courthouses in St. Stephen and Grand Manan would close. Reaction was swift, with municipal politicians and Charlotte County lawyers condeming the decision the following day.

Rules of court in New Brunswick establish that application for judicial reviews must be made within three months from the action that a person or group is seeking to have reviewed.

The barristers' society didn't apply for a judicial review until Oct. 7, 2015. The society arguedthe decision to close the courthouses didn't crystalize until the date of the closures was announced, putting the application within the three-month window.

However, the Appeal Court ruled that in the case of the court closures, the clock started ticking with the announcement in the budget speech.

There was nothing ambiguous about what was being announced.- Court of Appeal judgment

"The budget speech delivered in the Legislative Assembly was unequivocal: the courthouses were going to be closed," ruled the court. "There was nothing ambiguous about what was being announced and the announced closures were not premised on any pre-condition.

"A news release highlighting the fact the courthouses would be closed complemented the budget speech. Subsequently a media frenzy widely broadcast the closures.

"It simply cannot be said that the date the facilities would close had any relevance in determining the date of the decision sought to be challenged in the review," states the ruling. "It should have been known that time was of the essence if there was to be a judicial challenge."