The appellant, a former police officer, was investigated for corruption and bribery.
Police obtained a wiretap authorization based on an affidavit that deliberately misdescribed a police agent as a confidential informant.
The appellant was charged criminally based on intercepted communications, but the charges were eventually withdrawn by the Crown due to anticipated Charter breaches regarding the wiretap.
The appellant then sued the investigators and police board for malicious prosecution, negligent investigation, and other civil wrongs.
The trial judge dismissed the action, admitting the wiretap evidence and finding that the police had reasonable and probable grounds to lay the charges.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the wiretap evidence was properly admitted in the civil trial to establish the truth of the grounds for the charges, and that the trial judge made no error in finding that the investigators had both subjective and objective reasonable and probable grounds.
