Yuan, Li v. Transitional Council of the College of Traditional Chinese Medicine Practitioners and Acupuncturists of Ontario, 2014 ONSC 351
This is an application for a declaration that Ontario Regulation 27/13 ("The Registration Regulation") passed under the Traditional Chinese Medicine Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 27 (the "TCMA") is ultra vires and that it breached sections 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ("the Charter").
[...]
Section 4(1) of the Registration Regulation requires that applicants for membership in the TCM College be able to speak, read and write either English or French with reasonable fluency. Section 4(2) exempts members of the Grand-parented class from this requirement, and s. 7(1) requires such a member to practise in accordance with a written plan submitted by the member and that has been approved by a panel of the Registration Committee as being one that effectively deals with inter-professional and continuity of care issues arising from the member's lack of fluency in English or French. The practitioner Applicants pointed out that TCM is culturally, racially and linguistically Chinese-based and therefore there should be no language restrictions. They submitted that the language fluency requirements in the Registration Regulation were discriminatory and contravened s. 15 of the Charter.
However, in Lalonde v. Ontario (Commission de restructuration des service de santé), [2001] O.J. No. 4767 (C.A.) at paras. 96 to 101, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that language alone is not a protected ground under s.15 of the Charter, and that the Charter cannot be used directly or indirectly to expand language rights beyond the English and French languages protected under s. 16.
(par. 1, 11-12)
