Case in Brief

A Case in Brief is a short summary of a written decision of the Court, drafted in plain language. These summaries are prepared by staff of the Supreme Court of Canada. They do not form part of the Court’s reasons for judgment and are not for use in legal proceedings.

Resler v. Anglin

Case summary

The Supreme Court of Canada rules that most of a former Alberta election candidate’s civil claim against the province’s Chief Electoral Officer can go ahead.

Joseph Anglin was a Member of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta from 2012 to 2015. A Member of the Legislative Assembly, or “MLA”, is an elected representative in the provincial legislature. When an election is called, all MLAs stop being MLAs and are simply candidates for election. Mr. Anglin ran for re-election in the 2015 Alberta provincial election. During the campaign, the Chief Electoral Officer of Alberta, Glen Resler, fined Mr. Anglin and had at least 25 of his signs removed because the signs included sponsorship information smaller than the prescribed size and identified Mr. Anglin as an MLA after he no longer had that status. Mr. Resler further fined Mr. Anglin for failing to take reasonable steps to protect the electors list that was in his possession.

Mr. Anglin brought two legal proceedings to challenge the fines, both of which were unsuccessful. Mr. Anglin also brought a civil claim against Mr. Resler. The civil claim accepted the result of the election, but it claimed that Mr. Resler interfered with Mr. Anglin’s campaign and caused him harm, including the loss of a chance to be re-elected. Mr. Anglin also said Mr. Resler had misused his public powers, wrongly told the media that his signs were illegal, and was involved in the removal or destruction of his signs. He asked for money as compensation.

At Mr. Resler’s request, the court threw the lawsuit out. Mr. Anglin appealed that decision. The Court of Appeal agreed with Mr. Anglin and allowed his claim to go ahead, except for his allegation that there was no basis for the investigation and prosecution. Mr. Resler appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal.

There is a sufficient legal basis to allow Mr. Anglin’s claim to go ahead.

Writing for the majority of judges, Justice Moreau held that there are no legal barriers preventing the claim from going ahead. First, Mr. Anglin’s claim is not an indirect challenge to the election result. He is not asking the court to undo the election or change who was elected. Instead, he is asking for money because of Mr. Resler’s alleged conduct during the election process. Second, the claim is not an abuse of the court process. Mr. Anglin’s civil claim raises allegations that were different from the issues decided in the earlier, unsuccessful court proceedings. Those proceedings did not decide whether Mr. Resler had knowingly misused his public powers to harm Mr. Anglin’s campaign. Third, there is nothing in Mr. Resler’s role that protects him from this claim being brought. Fourth, Alberta’s Election Act does not bar the claim. The Act protects the Chief Electoral Officer from being sued for actions done in good faith, but Mr. Anglin alleged that Mr. Resler acted in bad faith.

Justice Moreau then considered whether Mr. Anglin’s claim has enough of a legal basis to continue. She said Mr. Anglin meets that standard. His lawsuit is based on a reasonable cause of action.