Anonymous

Difference between revisions of "Complaints Concerning Police Conduct (5:V)"

From Clicklaw Wikibooks
Line 183: Line 183:
EXAMPLE: An action brought by a complainant named John Smith could read “John Smith vs City of Vancouver, Constable Jane Doe, and Constable Richard Roe.”
EXAMPLE: An action brought by a complainant named John Smith could read “John Smith vs City of Vancouver, Constable Jane Doe, and Constable Richard Roe.”


'''NOTE:''' If the complaint is against a municipal police force, '''special limitation periods''' apply. The municipality must be informed by notice letter to sue within '''60 days''' ('''NOTE:''' filing a police complaint does '''not''' constitute notifying the municipality), and the notice of  claim should be filed within '''2 years''' of the incident (see ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2002/2002bcca61/2002bcca61.html?resultIndex=1 Gringmuth v The Corporation of the District of North Vancouver]'', 2002 BCCA 61). The regular Small Claims Court limitation periods apply if you are suing the RCMP or a private security guard.  
:'''NOTE:''' If the complaint is against a municipal police force, '''special limitation periods''' apply. The municipality must be informed by notice letter to sue within '''60 days''' ('''NOTE:''' filing a police complaint does '''not''' constitute notifying the municipality), and the notice of  claim should be filed within '''2 years''' of the incident (see ''[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2002/2002bcca61/2002bcca61.html?resultIndex=1 Gringmuth v The Corporation of the District of North Vancouver]'', 2002 BCCA 61). The regular Small Claims Court limitation periods apply if you are suing the RCMP or a private security guard.  


'''NOTE:''' Even if a complainant has not sent a notice letter to the municipal government,  the municipal government should still be named as a party. At trial, the claimant can argue they had a reasonable excuse for failing to deliver a notice letter to the city, and that the municipality has not been prejudiced by the failure to write the letter.
Even if a complainant has not sent a notice letter to the municipal government,  the municipal government should still be named as a party. At trial, the claimant can argue they had a reasonable excuse for failing to deliver a notice letter to the city, and that the municipality has not been prejudiced by the failure to write the letter.


'''NOTE:''' Even if the 60 day limitation period has expired, a complainant should still send a notice letter to the Clerk. If the municipality was provided with notice shortly after the 60 day period expired, it will be more difficult for them to argue that they were prejudiced by the failure to send the notice letter within 60 days.  
:'''NOTE:''' Even if the 60 day limitation period has expired, a complainant should still send a notice letter to the Clerk. If the municipality was provided with notice shortly after the 60 day period expired, it will be more difficult for them to argue that they were prejudiced by the failure to send the notice letter within 60 days.  


'''NOTE:''' If a municipal government or Minister of Justice is willing to accept liability on behalf of its officers where liability is proven, they may ask that the individual officers’ names to be removed from the lawsuit. While there may be reasons to keep the individual officers on the lawsuit, if the court finds they were left on unnecessarily, costs may be awarded against the complainant.  
'''NOTE:''' If a municipal government or Minister of Justice is willing to accept liability on behalf of its officers where liability is proven, they may ask that the individual officers’ names to be removed from the lawsuit. While there may be reasons to keep the individual officers on the lawsuit, if the court finds they were left on unnecessarily, costs may be awarded against the complainant.  
2,734

edits