Canada: Ontario Court Grants $20 Million Summary Judgment Against Government Of Canada For Unconstitutional Solitary Confinement Of Class Members

Last Updated: May 1 2019
Article by Henry Ngan

Most Read Contributor in Canada, July 2019

On March 25, 2019, Justice Perell of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice issued his decision in Brazeau v. Attorney General (Canada), ordering the Government of Canada to pay $20 million in damages to inmates who were subject to solitary confinement pursuant to an "administrative segregation." Justice Perell also delineated additional compensatory and Charter violation claims that the class members could pursue. This is a landmark case demonstrating how class actions may proceed in lockstep with Charter challenges.

Background

The federal Corrections and Conditional Release Act, which came into force in 1992, permits the administrative segregation of inmates at federal correctional facilities. Administrative segregation is the practice of isolating an inmate from the general population as a means to provide security amongst the inhabitants of the penitentiary. Administrative segregation is a form of solitary confinement. The act also permits staff to place inmates in "disciplinary segregation" if they commit serious offences while incarcerated.

Recently, public interest litigants have brought successful Charter challenges against provisions of the act with respect to administrative segregation in both Ontario and British Columbia (see Corporation of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association v. Her Majesty the Queen and British Columbia Civil Liberties Association v Canada (Attorney General) ).

In Brazeau, the class representative plaintiffs brought a class action against the Attorney General of Canada, seeking damages under the CanadianCharter of Rights and Freedoms, and punitive damages, on behalf of a class comprising inmates who were mentally ill and who spent time in administrative segregation in federal penitentiaries from 1992 to the present.

On consent, the court certified the action in 2016 with the following common issues:

  1. Did the government breach the class members' rights under s. 7 of the Charter? If so, were its actions saved by s. 1 of the Charter?
  2. Did the government breach the class members' rights under s. 9 of the Charter? If so, were its actions saved by s. 1 of the Charter?
  3. Did the government breach the class members' rights under s. 12 of the Charter? If so, were its actions saved by s. 1 of the Charter?
  4. If the government breached the class members' Charter rights and its actions were not saved by s. 1 of the Charter, are damages available to the class under s. 24 of the Charter?
  5. If the answer to the previous question is "yes", can the court make an aggregate assessment of the damages suffered by all class members as a part of the common issues trial?

Justice Perell was asked to consider the above questions on a summary judgment motion. He held that a summary judgment motion was an appropriate procedure, given that "the issues are capable of being fairly and proportionately resolved by a motion procedure." He also limited the class to the approximately two thousand individuals whose claims were not statute-barred due to the expiry of applicable limitation periods.

On March 25, 2019, after five days of hearings and consideration of an evidentiary record that is over 31,000 pages, he issued his decision, holding the government liable for $20 million in damages, and delineating additional compensatory and Charter violation claims that the class members can pursue.

Summary of Decision

Section 7Charter Claims

Section 7 of the Charter provides that everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.

On the evidence, Justice Perell found "that administrative segregation has the potentiality and the actuality of causing serious physical and serious psychological harm to any inmate," and that "the potentiality and actuality of serious physical and serious psychological harm is particularly acute for those already suffering from serious mental diseases and disabilities."

Justice Perell made two findings with respect to s. 7 of the Charter.

First, following the decisions in Corporation of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association v. Her Majesty the Queen and British Columbia Civil Liberties Association v Canada (Attorney General), Justice Perell found that the legislation violated s. 7 of the Charter by failing to provide for an adequate review process for placements in administrative segregation. This first finding of a Charter violation affected the entire class.

Second, Justice Perell found that the evidence supported a section 7 Charter violation with respect to individuals belonging to two subsets of the class: (a) those who were involuntarily placed in administrative segregation for more than 30 days; and, (b) those who were voluntarily placed in administrative segregation for more than 60 days. Perell J. made this finding without prejudice to any individual class member's right to assert, at an individual issues trial, that his or her particular treatment was contrary to section 7 of the Charter, in the circumstances.

Justice Perell was not convinced that the aforementioned Charter breaches could be justified or "saved" under section 1 of the Charter. On the evidence, he found that "in practice and in experience there is also no meaningful difference between administrative segregation and disciplinary segregation under the [CCRA]." Therefore, the legislative regime was overbroad and grossly disproportionate, because it treated with the same blunt instrument (i.e. solitary confinement) inmates with mental illnesses and inmates who committed serious offences while incarcerated.

Section9Charter Claims

Under section 9 of the Charter, everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned. Justice Perell did not find a class-wide breach of section 9. Administrative segregation was not arbitrary, because it was authorized by the act, and was limited to a restricted category of inmates.

Section 12Charter Claims

Section 12 of the Charter provides that everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.

On the evidence, Justice Perell found that there was cruel and unusual punishment for the mentally ill inmates placed involuntarily into administrative segregation for longer than 30 days, or placed voluntarily into administrative segregation for more than 60 days.

Interestingly, the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision in Corporation of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association v. Her Majesty the Queen was issued two days after Justice Perell's decision. In that case, the Court of Appeal held that administrative segregation longer than 15 consecutive days constituted cruel and unusual punishment. It is very likely that the Court of Appeal's decision will result in an adjustment to Justice Perell's findings.

Damages

The government argued that the court should not award the class members damages as a remedy under s. 24(1) of the Charter, because an individual remedy under s. 24(1) of the Charter will rarely be available where a court has already struck down legislation, absent conduct that was clearly wrong, in bad faith, or an abuse of power.

Justice Perell held that in this case damages to the whole class were justifiable, based upon the need for vindication and deterrence. He justified his damages award by the finding that:

[424] For decades, academic research, commissions, inquiries, inquests, court cases, domestic and international organizations, and the Correctional Investigator have recommended that the Correctional Service change its policies and practices with respect to the treatment of seriously-ill inmates placed in administrative segregation. The vindication of the Class Members' Charter rights requires that the Federal Government be directed to do what it ought to have done for decades.

[425] None of these Charter damages are for compensatory purposes, which is a function that will be left to the individual issues trials. The funds are to remedy to the harm caused to society which has suffered from the Correctional Service's failure to comply with the Charter and also its failure to comply with the spirit of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and its purpose of rehabilitating mentally ill inmates to return to society rather than worsening their capacity to do so by the harm caused by prolonged solitary confinement.

The government also argued that Charter damages could not be awarded as aggregate damages under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992.

On this issue, Justice Perell recognized that he could not determine, in the aggregate, the compensatory element of Charter damages, for the class or subclasses. However, Charter damages for vindication and deterrence, in his view, did not require individual assessment and he could award them on an aggregate basis, under the Class Proceedings Act, 1992. This is a significant finding. In essence, Justice Perell found the Charter breaches experienced by the inmates to constitute sufficient commonality permitting an award of aggregate damages.

Justice Perell quantified the Charter damages as $10,000 for each of the estimated 2,000 class members, totalling $20 million. He did not award punitive damages on top of Charter damages.

Issues Left for Individual Trials

Justice Perell found that the class members' quantification of their compensatory damages was a matter for individual issues trials. Each of 2,000 members of the class can pursue a claim for compensatory damages.

Furthermore, individuals belonging to the aforementioned subclasses (which will likely be refined in light of the Court of Appeal's decision in Corporation of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association v. Her Majesty the Queen) will have further claims for breach of ss. 7 and 12 of the Charter. The other class members who are not part of these subclasses are not prejudiced in their rights to bring claims alleging that they have suffered breaches of these rights as well.

Conclusion

The Brazeau decision is a landmark case, demonstrating how class actions may proceed in lockstep with Charter challenges. By confirming that courts can decide complex Charter breach issues on a summary judgment motion, and award aggregated damages in class proceedings alleging for Charter breaches, this decision creates a nexus between the policy objectives of class actions and public interest Charter litigation. Time will tell whether and how this decision will affect the way in which plaintiffs pursue public interest litigation in Ontario.

About BLG

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions