Members and other complainants can pursue various remedies under the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act, the most important of which are as follows:
The Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act authorizes a complainant to apply to court for leave to:
In The Campaign for the Inclusion of People who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing v. Canadian Hearing Society (released September 2018), Justice Wilton-Siegel of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice refused to find that the corporate applicant was a proper person to bring oppression proceedings against a federally incorporated charitable society and stayed the application of the individual applicants in favour of arbitration.
In Gill v. Kalgidhar Darbar Sahib Society (released May 2018), Justice Harvey of the Supreme Court of British Columbia refused to grant leave to a former executive member authorizing him to bring a derivative action on behalf of a religious society. The court found, in the circumstances, that the petitioner was not acting in good faith and that the derivative action did not appear to be in the best interests of the society.
The Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act entitles any member who has the right to vote at an annual meeting to submit a member proposal to the corporation, which proposal would be raised as special business at the meeting. The member is also entitled to discuss at the meeting any matter with respect to which the member would have been entitled to submit a proposal.
In Polish National Catholic Church of Canada v. Polish National Catholic Church (decided 2014), Justice Archibald of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice held that a corporate applicant had no standing to assert the private rights of two members of the Catholic Church and that the claim should be struck as disclosing no reasonable cause of action.
In Sobrinho v. Oakville Portuguese Canadian Club (decided 1982), an Ontario trial court ordered the winding up of a corporation without share capital because of deep and irreconcilable differences between two almost equally divided factions. A winding up is a rarely used remedy of last resort.
In Kay v Nipissing Twin Lakes Rod & Gun Club (decided 1993), an Ontario trial court ordered the winding up of a corporation without share capital that had outlived the original intentions of its founders. A winding up is a rarely used remedy of last resort.
In Hara v. Khalsa Diwan Society - New Westminster (decided 1996), the British Columbia Court of Appeal upheld a trial court decision setting aside the election of directors of a religious institution governed by the British Columbia Society Act (now the Societies Act).
In Keller v. Saskatchewan Baseball Assn. Inc. (decided 1999), Justice Pritchard of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench found that the Saskatchewan Baseball Association had acted oppressively in refusing to stay the suspension of one of its officers until his appeal was heard, and held that the association's appeals committee needed to be reconstituted to ensure that it was impartial.