An Act to amend the Act of incorporation of Queen's Theological College

How it changed on the way

42% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (817 words introduced, 784 passed).

moderate changeintent mostly kept

The bill as passed removed the explicit declaration that the College is affiliated with the University and adjusted some section numbering. It added the royal assent date while retaining the core amendments on the Board's composition, role, and appointment powers.

• The affiliation declaration between the College and University was deleted.

  Before: “University 8. The College is declared to be affiliated with the University.”

• The royal assent date was added to the bill title.

  After: “BILL S-15 ASSENTED TO 1st APRIL, 2004”

How precisely it is written

mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Hard

The bill uses defined terms and specific rules for board size, appointments, and approvals, making most powers and membership requirements clear. A few phrases still leave room for the board or General Council to decide details like exact numbers or by-law content.

Open to argument

• “in such manner and for such periods as may be provided for”

  Leaves the appointment process and terms entirely to future decisions by the General Council.

• “such number of members as may be determined by the Board”

  Gives the Board open-ended power to set its own size without fixed limits or criteria.

• “with such powers as it deems expedient”

  Uses a subjective test for what powers the Senate may receive.

• “for any other cause”

  Broad catch-all phrase for filling board vacancies beyond listed reasons.

Clear-cut

• “a majority of whom shall be members of the United Church of Canada”

  States an objective numerical test and clear membership requirement.

• “The Board may, without the approval of the General Council, appoint or remove all professors in the College other than pro”

  Draws a bright line between actions that do and do not need external approval.

Discretion. The General Council and Board retain discretion over appointment procedures, board size, by-laws, and Senate powers, all subject only to the internal approval requirements stated in the Act.

Challenging the law itself. The Act governs internal corporate structure of a private college with no direct limits on Charter rights such as expression or religion, so a vagueness or overbreadth challenge would face a high threshold.

Disputing a charge under it. Breaches would involve failure to follow specific appointment or approval steps that are factually verifiable from records, leaving little room to dispute whether the steps occurred.

Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.