Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: CV-20-84280 DATE: 2023/04/27 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: FRANCISCO CHAVES and DAYNA YOUNG, Plaintiffs AND: HIS MAJESTY THE KING, Defendant

BEFORE: Regional Senior Justice Calum MacLeod

COUNSEL: Stéphanie Dion & Yamen Fadel, for the Attorney General of Canada, Defendant (Moving Party) Morgan Rowe & Anna Rotman, for the Plaintiffs (Responding Parties)

HEARD: April 27, 2023

Decision and Reasons

C. MacLeod J. (Orally):

[1] This is a motion brought by the Attorney General of Canada to partially stay the action against the Crown in relation to alleged abuse of authority, bullying and harassment while the plaintiffs were employed as civilian members of the RCMP.

[2] The plaintiff Chaves is a resident of Quebec while the plaintiff Young is a resident of Ontario. Both were employed in the National Intelligence Coordination Centre (NICC) and both contend that they experienced harassment and bullying while the NICC was under the direction of Cameron Ortis. [^2] They also complain that the RCMP failed to treat them fairly in the aftermath of the arrest of Mr. Ortis.

[3] There is a class proceeding in Quebec which has been authorized but only for a Quebec class and not nationally. [^3] The class definition in that action is somewhat vague as it depends in part on whether or not individuals are holding certain documents. Although the Superior Court of Quebec recently declined to allow Mr. Chavez to opt out of the class after the opt out date provided for in the certification order had expired, the court also stated that it could not determine on the materials before the court whether Mr. Chavez was in or out of the class.

En conséquence, le Tribunal est d'avis que seul le juge saisi de l'affaire en Ontario pourra déterminer si oui ou non le recours institué devant lui est recevable ou non, et ce, en fonction du dossier tel que constitué devant lui ou en fonction d'une preuve pouvant être établie par des interrogatoires au préalable. Dans l'intervalle, le Tribunal québécois nage dans le néant puisque le dossier tel que constitué au Québec ne permet pas de porter un jugement sur le recours entrepris par Chavez en Ontario, le Tribunal ne pouvant donc savoir si celui-ci entre ou non dans la définition du groupe. [^4]

[4] The Quebec class proceeding deals with harassment and bullying in the RCMP generally and failures of management to deal with it appropriately and does not specifically deal with the allegations against Mr. Ortis although it is possible that this situation could be one of the situations covered by the class proceeding.

[5] Staying an action even temporarily should only be done if it is just to do so having regard to the four part test cited by both counsel. [^5] On the facts of this case, I decline to impose a stay for reasons that may be summarized as follows:

a. There is no significant judicial economy or savings of costs to the parties if I stay only Mr. Chavez’s portion of this action. Ms. Young is not part of the Quebec class proceeding and this action will proceed with or without Mr. Chavez. b. It is far from clear that Mr. Chavez will be part of the Quebec class although it is a possibility. c. There are certain aspects of this case that appear to post-date the date when Mr. Chavez could have opted out of the Quebec class proceeding. There are aspects of this case that may not be covered by the class proceeding. d. There is no real prejudice to Canada in permitting this action to continue. e. Any issue of double recovery or of inconsistent findings may be addressed at a later date in the proceeding.

[6] The motion is therefore dismissed with costs as agreed between the parties.

[7] Counsel have advised that, given the result, $600 is to be paid to Ms. Young and $1400 is to be paid to Mr. Chavez.

[8] The Attorney General has asked for 30 days from this decision or the disposition of any appeal therefrom to file a defence. That order is granted.

[9] The title of the proceedings will also be amended to show the Attorney General for Canada as the defendant pursuant to s. 23 of the Crown Liability and Proceedings Act (Canada).

Justice C. MacLeod Date: April 27, 2023

Footnotes

[^1]: The decision has undergone minor editing prior to release for publishing. [^2]: Mr. Ortis is currently facing criminal proceedings for allegedly selling security information but those charges are not directly related to this litigation. [^3]: Deslisle c. R., 2018 QCCS 3855 – the class includes plaintiffs who reside in Quebec or suffered damage in Quebec. [^4]: Transcription of the oral decision of Synnott J., court file no. 500-06-000820-163 dated November 28, 2022 [^5]: Vaeth v North American Palladium Ltd., 2016 ONSC 5015 @