Jean Faullem

The defendants, Ontario, Quebec, and Canada, sought leave to appeal a motion judge's decision that dismissed their motions for summary judgment and allowed the plaintiffs to amend their statement of claim.

The underlying action involved a fatal collision following a high-speed chase by Akwesasne Police Service officers, with the plaintiffs alleging vicarious and direct liability against the government defendants.

The court granted leave to appeal, finding that the motion judge's decision conflicted with established appellate authorities on the tests for summary judgment, amending pleadings, and establishing a private law duty of care, and that there was good reason to doubt the correctness of the decision.

Civil action arising from a fatal motor vehicle collision following a police pursuit conducted by officers of a First Nations police service operating under a quadripartite policing agreement among federal and provincial governments and a First Nation.

Provincial governments moved for summary judgment arguing they could not be vicariously liable for the conduct of the police officers because they exercised no operational control.

The court held that the complex governance structure, degree of governmental oversight, and the unique jurisdictional circumstances raised factual issues regarding control, partnership, and potential vicarious liability that required a full evidentiary record at trial.

The plaintiffs also sought to amend their statement of claim to allege negligence for failure to implement recommendations from a prior policing audit; most amendments were permitted.

Summary judgment was refused and leave to amend was largely granted.

Civil action arising from a fatal motor vehicle collision following a police pursuit conducted by officers of a First Nations police service operating under a quadripartite policing agreement among federal and provincial governments and a First Nation.

Provincial governments moved for summary judgment arguing they could not be vicariously liable for the conduct of the police officers because they exercised no operational control.

The court held that the complex governance structure, degree of governmental oversight, and the unique jurisdictional circumstances raised factual issues regarding control, partnership, and potential vicarious liability that required a full evidentiary record at trial.

The plaintiffs also sought to amend their statement of claim to allege negligence for failure to implement recommendations from a prior policing audit; most amendments were permitted.

Summary judgment was refused and leave to amend was largely granted.