Police Officers — Ontario Employment Law

S. v. B.

Appeal Allowed: Superior Court Retains Jurisdiction

This is a procedural ruling on jurisdiction in an action brought by a police officer challenging his suspension and seeking damages for Charter breaches and misfeasance in public office. The Court of Appeal determined that the Superior Court of Justice retains jurisdiction over the claims, finding that they do not arise under the collective agreement, and that judicial review is not the exclusive remedy.

R. v. Ottawa (Police Services Board)

Police Officer Tort Claims vs Collective Agreement Jurisdiction

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a motion judge's decision dismissing a police officer's tort action against his employer and colleagues. The employee sued for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office, alleging his coworkers intentionally provided false information to an independent criminal investigation against him. The motion judge dismissed the claim, finding it was a workplace dispute governed exclusively by the collective agreement and the Police Services Act. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and restored the action. The Court found that once the independent criminal investigation began, the dispute was no longer workplace-centred and fell completely outside the exclusive jurisdiction of the collective agreement.

Ottawa Police Services v. D.

Police Officer Performance Complaint: Judicial Review

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a Divisional Court judicial review decision regarding a police officer's unsatisfactory work performance. The Ottawa Police Services had charged C.D. with unsatisfactory work performance and sought his dismissal, but the Ontario Civilian Police Commission ordered his reinstatement. The Divisional Court overturned the Commission's decision on judicial review. The Court of Appeal allowed the police officer's appeal and restored the Commission's decision, finding that the police service failed to follow its own mandatory performance review policies. The decision to reinstate the police officer stands.

M. v. York Regional Police Services Board

Police Employment: Weber Principle & Jurisdiction

This is a motion to strike pleadings brought by a police officer against her employer. The central legal issue is whether the Superior Court has jurisdiction or if the dispute falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of an arbitrator under the collective agreement and the Police Services Act, applying the Weber principle. The court considered whether claims for misfeasance in public office and discrimination could survive this jurisdictional challenge.

Police Constable Kevin Cote v. Ontario Human Rights Commission

Judicial Review of Human Rights Tribunal Order: Mootness

This is a judicial review application brought by police officers challenging a Human Rights Tribunal order for the production of their personnel records. The Divisional Court reviewed the application's mootness, as the Tribunal's order had already been complied with and no responsive documents were found, considering whether a live controversy existed.

Toronto Police Association v. Toronto Police Services Board

Toronto Police Association v Toronto Police Services Board

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a motion judge's decision regarding jurisdiction over a dispute between a police association and a police services board. The dispute concerned an alleged agreement on disciplinary penalties for officers who wore uniforms to a union rally. The motion judge found the dispute was contractual and within the court's jurisdiction. The Court of Appeal held that the essential character of the dispute was one of police discipline governed exclusively by the Police Services Act, and thus the court lacked jurisdiction.

C. v. Chatham-Kent Police Services Board

This is a legal dispute concerning the terms of a contract of employment involving the Chatham-Kent Police Services Board. The case addresses issues related to the contractual relationship between the employer and the employee.

H. v. Durham Regional Police Services Board

Police Officers' Employment Claims: Jurisdiction and Fiduciary Duty

A merits decision involving police officers who brought a civil action alleging various torts and breaches of duty arising from disciplinary proceedings under the Police Services Act. The court addressed whether the Superior Court has jurisdiction over such claims and whether breach of fiduciary duty is a valid cause of action in an employment relationship governed by a collective agreement.

A. v. C.

Final vs Interlocutory Orders in Police Employment Dispute

This is a motion by the plaintiffs to quash the defendants' appeal from a motion judge's decision. The plaintiffs were police officers disputing their employment, and the defendants moved to dismiss the action for lack of jurisdiction, arguing the dispute was covered by a collective agreement. The motion judge dismissed the defendants' motion, finding the claim was outside the collective agreement. The Court of Appeal decided that the motion judge's order was a final order, not interlocutory, because it finally disposed of the jurisdiction defence. Therefore, the plaintiffs' motion to quash the appeal was dismissed.

Ontario (Civilian Commission on Police Services) v. B.

OCCPS v. B. - Ontario Court of Appeal Decision

This was an appeal to the Court of Appeal from two separate Divisional Court decisions granting judicial reviews of decisions by the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police Services. The Commission had ordered hearings into public complaints about police officer conduct. The Divisional Court had quashed the Commission's decisions for failing to sufficiently specify the allegations. The Court of Appeal allowed the Commission's appeals, finding that the Commission provided enough information for the chiefs of police to process the complaints, and that a formal framing of charges was not required. The orders of the Divisional Court were set aside and the applications for judicial review were dismissed.

P. v. Metropolitan Toronto Police Services Board

Jurisdiction: Police Officer Defamation vs. Collective Agreement

This is a jurisdictional ruling by the Court of Appeal for Ontario determining whether the courts or a labour tribunal have authority over a police officer's claims for defamation, malicious prosecution, and negligence. Applying the test from Weber v. Ontario Hydro, the court analyzed whether the dispute arose from the collective agreement or statutory disciplinary powers under the Police Services Act.

L. v. Stratford (City)

Mandatory Retirement: Police Officers Age Discrimination

This judicial review concerns a challenge to a mandatory retirement policy for police officers at age 60, alleging age discrimination under the Ontario Human Rights Code. The Divisional Court reviewed the Human Rights Tribunal's findings on whether the policy constituted a bona fide occupational requirement, examining both subjective and objective tests regarding safety and performance. The court also addressed allegations of bias by the board chairman.

H. v. Ontario (Attorney-General) (H.C.J.)

OPP Collective Bargaining Charter Challenge

This is a constitutional decision regarding the freedom of association and equality rights of Ontario Provincial Police officers concerning their right to collective bargaining. The court found that the complete prohibition on collective bargaining for senior OPP officers violated section 2(d) of the Charter and was not justified. Additionally, the distinction between OPP officers and municipal police officers regarding bargaining rights was found to violate section 15 of the Charter.

Re Commissioner of Ontario Provincial Police and P.

Judicial Review of Police Resignation: Delay and Duress

A police officer sought judicial review of his resignation, alleging it was obtained under duress. The court addressed procedural and substantive issues, including whether the court had inherent jurisdiction to quash the application due to inordinate delay, whether judicial review was inappropriate due to disputed facts and credibility issues, and whether the resignation constituted an exercise of statutory power subject to review.

C. et al. v. Board of Commissioners of Police of the Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto et al.

Police Suspension Damages: Lost Overtime & Mitigation

This is an appeal concerning police officers who were suspended with pay following criminal charges and subsequently acquitted. The Court of Appeal addressed whether the officers were entitled to damages for lost overtime, court time, and shift bonuses, and whether the duty to mitigate applied in this context.

Re H. and Commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police

Police Officer Resignation: Jurisdiction of Divisional Court

An appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario from a Divisional Court decision regarding the validity of a police officer's resignation. The Court of Appeal held that the Divisional Court lacked jurisdiction to intervene because the resignation was voluntary and no statutory procedural rights were violated under the Police Act.

Re B. and Waterloo Regional Board of Commissioners of Police et al.

Judicial Review: Police Chief Dismissal & Procedural Fairness

This is a judicial review application concerning the dismissal of a regional police chief by the Ontario Police Commission. The court examined whether the Commission failed to meet its duty of procedural fairness by relying on a hearing before the Board of Commissioners of Police where natural justice was denied to the chief. The court found that the Board's actions tainted the fairness of the Commission's hearing.

Re N. and Haldimand-Norfolk Regional Board of Commissioners of Police

Police Officer Dismissal: Wages and Limitation Period Appeal

This is an appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario from a Divisional Court decision regarding the dismissal of a probationary police constable. The court determined that the rehearing of the dismissal was a continuation of the original proceeding rather than a new one, meaning the six-month limitation period under the Public Authorities Protection Act did not bar the board from resuming proceedings. Additionally, the court ruled that the constable was entitled to wages from the date of the invalid dismissal until the date of the rehearing, subject to deductions for income from other sources. This decision was appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, which upheld it (N. v. Haldimand-Norfolk Regional Board of Commissioners of Police, [1981] 1 SCR 92). The Supreme Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal because it will not entertain an application for leave to appeal on an issue where the intermediate appellate court previously refused leave to appeal from the Divisional Court.

B. v. Waterloo Regional Police Commissioners

Police Chief Termination: Procedural Fairness Review

This is a judicial review concerning the termination of the Chief of Police by the Board of Commissioners of Police. The court examined whether the Board complied with procedural fairness and statutory requirements under The Police Act before terminating the Chief. The court found that the Board failed to provide adequate notice or a hearing, violating principles of natural justice.

M. v. Board of Police Commissioners of City of Peterborough et al.

Police Officer Entitled to Pay During Appeal of Dismissal

A wrongful dismissal case involving a police officer who was dismissed and sought pay during the appeal process under section 27 of R.R.O. 1970, Regulation 680. The court held that the officer retained entitlement to full pay until the appeal was concluded, and that there was no duty to mitigate damages due to statutory entitlements.