No Cause of Action Against SIU for Alleged Negligent Investigation
Last Friday, the Ontario Court of Appeal released a decision on the question of whether victims, their family or their estate of crimes committed by police can sue the Special Investigations Unit (SIU).
In Wellington v. Ontario, 2011 ONCA 274 (CanLII), the court considered a claim brought by the deceased’s mother, sister and the deceased’s estate. They alleged, inter alia, that the SIU was negligent in its investigation of the police officers involved in the death of the deceased, and as a result, they claimed general and punitive damages on the grounds that the SIU’s alleged failure to conduct a competent investigation compounded the respondents' grief and distress, deprived them of the right to have a reasonable understanding of the deceased’s death, compromised their participation in the coroner’s inquest, and lessened their opportunity to recover damages in a civil action against the two officers.
The SIU brought a motion to dismiss the claim as disclosing no cause of action. The Judge below dismissed the motion, and the SIU appealed.
On appeal, the Court of Appeal agreed that the Statement of Claim did not disclose a cause of action. The Court held that there is no private law duty of care owed to victims of crime, their families or their estate by the SIU. The Court confirmed that investigations and prosecutions are matters of public law and public interest, and do not give rise to a duty of care in these circumstances. The Court considered the extension of a duty of care to the SIU. The Court found that there was nothing in the legislation that established the SIU, or any policy reason, to extend a private duty of care to the SIU. In fact, there were policy reasons not to extend such a duty.
Having so found, the Court went on to add that this conclusion should not be read as minimizing the legitimate concerns of victims and their families for a thorough and effective investigation, or excluding their participation in the legal process where appropriate.
The Court recognized that refusing to extend a duty of care to police investigations does not leave victims, families [or their estates] without appropriate or viable legal recourse.
Thank you for reading.
Paul E. Trudelle - Click here for more information on Paul Trudelle.
