In Trow v. Toronto Humane Society (decided 2001), the Ontario Superior Court of Justice set aside by-laws purportedly passed at a meeting of members on the grounds that the notice for the meeting was materially misleading.
In Samra v. Guru Nanak Gurdwara Society (decided 2008), the British Columbia Court of Appeal set aside attempts by three separate factions to stack the membership rolls in preparation for a vote for the election of the board of a religious institution that operated a Sikh temple in Surrey, British Columbia.
In Jacobs v. Ontario Medical Association. (released August 2016), Justice Perell of the Ontario Court of Justice used a scalpel to cut through the various demands of a dissident group of members of the Ontario Medical Association, finding merit only in the OMA's form of proxy and making adjustments to the proxy to address the court's concerns.
In his 2014 decision in Hunjan v. Singh, Justice Sproat of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice wisely points out that often too much time, effort and expense is devoted to fighting over the validity of meetings of members and the validity of elections. The time, effort and resources are generally better spent on building a solid foundation for future meetings and elections, rather than contesting results of the past.
In Lee v. Lee's Benevolent Assn. of Ontario (decided in 2004), Justice Nordheimer of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice stated, in the context of a disputed election of directors at a meeting of members of a not-for-profit (NFP) corporation incorporated under the Ontario Corporations Act, that NFP organizations should not be required to adhere rigorously to all of the technical requirements of corporate procedure for their meetings, so long as the basic process is fair. On appeal, the Ontario Divisional Court affirmed the trial court's decision but neither embraced or refuted Justice Nordheimer's statement about the standard applicable to meetings of NFP organizations.
Montreal & Canadian Diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia Inc. v. Protection of the Holy Virgin Russian Orthodox Church (Outside of Russia) in Ottawa Inc., a 2002 decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, stands as the leading authority on court-ordered meetings of members of not-for-profit corporations, including charitable corporations.
In its 2010 decision in Ovarian Cancer Awareness & Treatment in Saskatchewan Corp., Re., the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench refused to allow a plan of arrangement to be used to exempt a corporation from the requirement to convene a meeting of members to approve an amendment to its articles of incorporation.
In Muslim Assn. of Calgary v. Osman (released October 2015), Nixon J. of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench set out rules for a court-ordered election process designed to remove uncertainties about who was governing a not-for-profit corporation incorporated under the Religious Societies' Land Act (Alberta) (RSLA). The trial court decision was affirmed by the Alberta Court of Appeal in a judgment released in March 2016.
In Sandhu v. Siri Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara of Alberta (released in March 2015), the Alberta Court of Appeal weighed-in on a battle for control of the governing board of a religious organization incorporated under the Alberta Religious Societies Land Act, affirming the lower court ruling in the case.
In Deol v. Ontario Khalsa Darbar (released October 2015), Justice Molloy, presiding in her capacity as a one-judge panel of the Ontario Divisional Court, affirmed a lower-court ruling refusing to enjoin a meeting of the members of a religious corporation operating a Sikh temple (Gurdwara).