Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

[2018] 3 F.C.R. D-19

RCMP

Judicial review applications of decision to initiate conduct board hearing against applicant (T-1197-16) and of decision to extend prescribed time for initiating such hearing (T-891-16) — Applicant, civilian member (CM) of Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) — Conduct measures imposed on applicant by conduct authority for violations of RCMP Code of Conduct relating to sexual assault and harassment — Review authority subsequently determining, in accordance with Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, R.S.C., 1985, c R-10, s. 41(1), that conduct measures imposed disproportionate to nature, circumstances of contraventions, that conduct board hearing required — However, that decision made after expiry of prescription period set out in Act, s. 41(2), which imposes prescription period of one year during which decision to initiate a conduct board hearing may be made — Delegated decision maker for Commissioner on applications for extensions granting extension of time to initiate inquiry under Act, s. 47.4(1) — Principal issues herein whether application in T-891-16 premature; whether decision to grant extension of time statute-barred ; whether review authority fettering discretion; whether decision to initiate conduct board hearing reasonable — Act, s. 47.4(1) silent on whether extension can be granted after prescribed period — Following careful review of legislative history, Court satisfied that limitation period in Act, s. 41(2) can be extended by Commissioner under Act, s. 47.4(1) after expiry of prescribed year — Thus, as application for extension not time-barred, application in T-891-16 premature — Evidence not establishing that review authority’s decision fettered — Rather, evidence demonstrating that decision result of independent analysis — Finally, review authority’s decision to initiate conduct board hearing reasonable — Review authority’s reasons, while brief, sufficient to understand why tribunal made its decision and to determine whether the decision fell within the range of acceptable outcomes — Applications dismissed.

Calandrini v. Canada (Attorney General) (T-891-16, T-1197-16, 2018 FC 52, Mosley J., judgment dated January 19, 2018, 57 pp)

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.