Can v. Calgary Chief of Police et al.,

• Judge: Conrad, O'Brien and Wakeling, JJ.A.
• Neutral Citation: 2014 ABCA 322
• Citation: 2014 ABCA 322,(2014), 584 A.R. 147,560 AR 202,315 CCC (3d) 337,584 AR 147,(2014), 584 AR 147,584 A.R. 147
• Date: 06 May 2014
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)

Can v. Police Chief (2014), 584 A.R. 147; 623 W.A.C. 147 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2014] A.R. TBEd. OC.057

Jim Can (appellant/plaintiff) v. Jack Beaton acting as the Chief of Police for the Calgary Police Service, Douglas Andrus, John Manahan, John Brydges and John Miller (respondents/defendants) and Attorney General of Alberta, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta, Alberta Minister of Justice, John Doe, Jim Doe, and Emmanuel (Mac) Vomberg (not parties to the appeal/defendants)

(1301-0154-AC; 2014 ABCA 322)

Indexed As: Can v. Calgary Chief of Police et al.

Alberta Court of Appeal

Conrad, O'Brien and Wakeling, JJ.A.

October 10, 2014.

Summary:

Can was arrested and charged with extortion and forcible confinement. The Crown stayed the charges. Can commenced an action against the Chief of Police for the Calgary Police Service (CPS) and members of the CPS for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and negligent investigation. The defendants applied for summary judgment to dismiss the claims on the basis that there were reasonable and probable grounds for Can's arrest.

A Master of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at (2012), 541 A.R. 159, granted the application for summary dismissal. Can appealed.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at (2013), 560 A.R. 202, dismissed the appeal. Can appealed.

The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 3212

Compelling appearance, detention and release - Arrest - Arrest without warrant - [See both Police - Topic 3063 ].

Police - Topic 3063

Powers - Arrest and detention - Without warrant - Reasonable and probable grounds - Can was arrested and charged with extortion and forcible confinement - It was subsequently learned that the complainant (Sarvucci) had a conviction for perjury - The Crown stayed the charges against Can - Can commenced an action against the Chief of Police for the Calgary Police Service (CPS) and members of the CPS for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and negligent investigation - The defendants applied for summary judgment to dismiss the claims on the basis that there were reasonable and probable grounds for Can's arrest - A Master granted the application and the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed Can's appeal - Can appealed - The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - There were reasonable and probable grounds to arrest Can - Information concerning Can's alleged involvement in criminal activities was provided by Sarvucci when he was interviewed by Detectives Andrus and Brydges late on the day of the complaint and in the early hours of the following day before Can's arrest - That interview was audio and videotaped - Sarvucci subsequently provided a written statement, which appeared to repeat and perhaps enlarge upon what he had told the police in his oral interview - The mere fact that Detective Andrus did not yet have the formal written statement at the time of the arrest did not mean that he could not rely on the information gleaned from Sarvucci through the earlier interview - Furthermore, interviews conducted with Sarvucci's wife and an office assistant before the arrest tended to corroborate Sarvucci's complaint in certain material aspects and to demonstrate the consistency of his allegations - See paragraphs 6 to 7.

Police - Topic 3063

Powers - Arrest and detention - Without warrant - Reasonable and probable grounds - Can was arrested and charged with extortion and forcible confinement - It was subsequently learned that the complainant (Sarvucci) had a conviction for perjury - The Crown stayed the charges against Can - Can commenced an action against the Chief of Police for the Calgary Police Service (CPS) and members of the CPS for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and negligent investigation - The defendants applied for summary judgment to dismiss the claims on the basis that there were reasonable and probable grounds for Can's arrest - A Master granted the application and the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed Can's appeal - Can appealed - The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The court (Conrad and O'Brien, JJ.A.) stated that "While the evidence at the time of Mr. Can's arrest concerning his involvement in the alleged criminal activities was not overwhelming, in the sense of establishing a prima facie case for conviction, and additional investigation was ongoing and necessary, such evidence as there was at the time provided the necessary objective justification to support Det. Andrus's subjective view that Mr. Can was a participant in the alleged extortion scheme. Whatever the precise measurement of the degree of certainty required for a warrantless arrest, here the information disclosed to Det. Andrus prior to the time of arrest was sufficient to allow a reasonable person in his position to conclude that there were reasonable and probable grounds to arrest Mr. Can. It follows that there is no genuine issue for trial" - See paragraph 9.

Police - Topic 5031

Actions against police - Negligence - Conduct of investigation (incl. negligent investigation) - [See both Police - Topic 3063 ].

Police - Topic 5047

Actions against police - For false arrest - Defence of reasonable and probable grounds - [See both Police - Topic 3063 ].

Police - Topic 5073

Actions against police - For false imprisonment - Defence of reasonable and probable grounds - [See both Police - Topic 3063 ].

Practice - Topic 5719

Judgments and orders - Summary judgments - To dismiss action - Can was arrested and charged with extortion and forcible confinement - The Crown stayed the charges - Can commenced an action against the Chief of Police for the Calgary Police Service (CPS) and members of the CPS for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and negligent investigation - The defendants applied for summary judgment to dismiss the claims on the basis that there were reasonable and probable grounds for Can's arrest - A Master granted the application and the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed Can's appeal - Can appealed - The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal - The court (Conrad and O'Brien, JJ.A.) stated that "In our view the analyses undertaken by both the Master and the Queen's Bench judge was correct. Their judgments reflect an appreciation both of the relevant facts and applicable law. They concluded that there were no genuine issues for trial. While current Rule 7.3 (1)(b) is framed in terms of a claim being 'without merit', such a finding flows when a claimant has not established any genuine issue for trial. In other words, the new Rule has not substantively changed the test for summary judgment from that under former Rule 159 (3) which spoke in terms of 'no genuine issue for trial'" - See paragraph 10.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Storrey, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 241; 105 N.R. 81; 37 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [paras. 3, 65, footnote 14].

Hryniak v. Mauldin, [2014] 1 S.C.R. 87; 453 N.R. 51; 314 O.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 17].

Beier et al. v. Proper Cat Construction Ltd. et al. (2013), 564 A.R. 357; 2013 ABQB 351, refd to. [para. 20].

Bahcheli v. Yorkton Securities Inc. et al. (2012), 524 A.R. 382; 545 W.A.C. 382; 2012 ABCA 166, refd to. [para. 62, footnote 10].

Gayton v. Lacasse (2010), 482 A.R. 179; 490 W.A.C. 179; 2010 ABCA 123, refd to. [para. 63, footnote 12].

Murphy Oil Co. et al. v. Predator Corp. et al. (2006), 384 A.R. 251; 367 W.A.C. 251; 2006 ABCA 69, refd to. [para. 63, footnote 13].

R. v. Golub (D.J.) (1997), 102 O.A.C. 176; 34 O.R.(3d) 743; 117 C.C.C.(3d) 193 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 65, footnote 14].

Kvello et al. v. Miazga et al., [2009] 3 S.C.R. 339; 395 N.R. 115; 337 Sask.R. 260; 464 W.A.C. 260, refd to. [para. 65, footnote 14].

R. v. Shepherd (C.), [2009] 2 S.C.R. 527; 391 N.R. 132; 331 Sask.R. 306; 460 W.A.C. 306; 2009 SCC 35, refd to. [para. 65, footnote 14].

Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 71].

Desoto Resources Ltd. v. Encana Corp. et al. (2011), 513 A.R. 72; 530 W.A.C. 72; 2011 ABCA 100, refd to. [para. 71].

Dingwall et al. v. Foster et al. (2014), 572 A.R. 106; 609 W.A.C. 106; 2014 ABCA 89, refd to. [para. 71].

Dingwall v. Dornan - see Dingwall et al. v. Foster et al.

Burns (P.) Resources Ltd. v. Locke, Stock & Barrel Co., [2014] A.R. Uned. 29; 2014 ABCA 40, refd to. [para. 71].

Miller et al. v. Magellan Morada Investment Limited Partnership (2009), 448 A.R. 331; 447 W.A.C. 331; 2009 ABCA 124, refd to. [para. 71].

Stobbe v. Paramount Investments Inc. et al. (2013), 566 A.R. 155; 597 W.A.C. 155; 2013 ABCA 384, refd to. [para. 71].

R. v. MacKenzie (B.C.), [2013] 3 S.C.R. 250; 448 N.R. 246; 423 Sask.R. 185; 588 W.A.C. 185, refd to. [para. 72].

R. v. Chehil (M.S.), [2013] 3 S.C.R. 220; 448 N.R. 370; 335 N.S.R.(2d) 1; 1060 A.P.R. 1, refd to. [para. 72].

Chu et al. v. Chen et al., [2002] B.C.T.C. 906; 22 C.P.C.(5th) 73 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 73, footnote 15].

O'Hanlon Paving Ltd. v. Serengetti Developments Ltd. et al. (2013), 567 A.R. 140; 91 Alta. L.R.(5th) 1; 2013 ABQB 428, ref to. [para. 75].

Windsor v. Canadian Pacific Railway Ltd. (2014), 572 A.R. 317; 609 W.A.C. 317; 2014 ABCA 108, refd to. [para. 75].

Orr v. Fort McKay First Nation (2014), 587 A.R. 16; 2014 ABQB 111, refd to. [para. 75].

Deguire v. Burnett (2013), 568 A.R. 341; 2013 ABQB 488, refd to. [para. 76, footnote 19].

Hajjar v. Repetowski, [2001] 8 W.W.R. 539; 319 A.R. 251; 2001 ABQB 432, refd to. [para. 76, footnote 21].

Thompson v. Cardel Homes Limited Partnership et al. (2014), 577 A.R. 356; 613 W.A.C. 356; 2014 ABCA 242, refd to. [para. 76, footnote 21].

Access Mortgage Corp. (2004) Ltd. v. Arres Capital Inc. (2014), 584 A.R. 68; 623 W.A.C. 68; 2014 ABCA 280, refd to. [para. 77, footnote 22].

Bonsma v. Tesco Corp., [2011] A.R. Uned. 697; 2011 ABQB 620, refd to. [para. 77, footnote 22].

Richter v. Chemerinski et al., [2010] A.R. Uned. 364; 2010 ABQB 302, refd to. [para. 77, footnote 22].

Elliott v. Amante (2001), 306 A.R. 82; 2001 ABQB 1080, refd to. [para. 77, footnote 22].

U.B.'s Autobody Ltd. et al. v. Reid's Welding (1981) Inc. et al. (1999), 258 A.R. 325 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 77, footnote 22].

Compton Petroleum Corp. v. Alberta Power Ltd. (1999), 242 A.R. 3 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 77, footnote 22].

Diegel v. Diegel, [2008] A.R. Uned. 304; 2008 ABCA 389, refd to. [para. 87, footnote 33].

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett (1986), 477 U.S. 317, refd to. [para. 87, footnote 33].

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby Inc. (1986), 477 U.S. 242, refd to. [para. 87, footnote 33].

Jackamarra v. Krakouer (1998), 195 C.L.R. 516 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 87, footnote 33].

Soni v. Malik (1985), 61 B.C.L.R. 36 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 87, footnote 34].

Inspiration Management Ltd. v. McDermid St. Lawrence Ltd. (1989), 36 B.C.L.R.(2d) 202 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 87, footnote 34].

Jama v. Immigration and Custom Enforcement (2005), 543 U.S. 335, refd to. [para. 90].

SHN Grundstuecksverwaltungsgesellschaft MBH & Co. Seniorenresidenz Hoppegarten-Neuenhagen KG v. Hanne (2012), 550 A.R. 129; 72 Alta. L.R.(5th) 276 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 91].

Welch v. Bancarz, [2008] A.R. Uned. 163; 2008 ABQB 60, refd to. [para. 91].

Adams et al. v. Norcen Energy Resources Ltd. (1999), 248 A.R. 120; 72 Alta. L.R.(3d) 234 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 91].

AT Films Inc. v. AT Plastics Inc. et al., [2014] A.R. Uned. 493; 2014 ABQB 422, refd to. [para. 92, footnote 40].

Schaffer v. Lalonde et al. (2014), 587 A.R. 157; 2014 ABQB 222 (Master), refd to. [para. 92, footnote 40].

1214777 Alberta Ltd. et al. v. 480955 Alberta Ltd., [2014] A.R. Uned. 330; 2014 ABQB 301, refd to. [para. 92, footnote 40].

Dr. Therese Thomas Dentistry, Professional Corp. et al. v. Bank of Nova Scotia et al., [2010] O.A.C. Uned. 1227; 95 C.P.C.(6th) 96 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 92, footnote 41].

J.N. v. G.J.K. et al. (2004), 361 A.R. 177; 339 W.A.C. 177; 2004 ABCA 394, refd to. [para. 94].

1214934 Alberta Ltd. v. Clean Cut Ltd. et al., [2014] A.R. Uned. 355; 2014 ABQB 330, refd to. [para. 97, footnote 44].

Lameman et al. v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., [2008] 1 S.C.R. 372; 372 N.R. 239; 429 A.R. 26; 421 W.A.C. 26, refd to. [para. 98].

Manson Insulation Products Ltd. v. Crossroads C & I Distributors et al., [2011] A.R. Uned. 82; 2011 ABQB 51, refd to. [para. 101, footnote 46].

Manufacturers Life Insurance Co. v. Executive Centre at Manulife Place Inc., [2011] A.R. Uned. 252; [2011] 11 W.W.R. 833 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 101, footnote 46].

Mraiche Investment Corp. v. Paul et al. (2011), 511 A.R. 268; 2011 ABQB 164, refd to. [para. 101, footnote 46].

Kwan v. Superfly Inc. et al. (2011), 520 A.R. 234; 2011 ABQB 343, refd to. [para. 101, footnote 46].

Encana Corp. v. ARC Resources Ltd. (2011), 523 A.R. 108; 2011 ABQB 431, refd to. [para. 101, footnote 46].

R. v. Smellie (S.A.) (1994), 53 B.C.A.C. 202; 87 W.A.C. 202; 95 C.C.C.(3d) 9 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 107, footnote 48].

Christie v. Leachinsky, [1947] A.C. 573 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 107, footnote 48].

Beckwith v. Philby (1827), 108 E.R. 585 (K.B.), refd to. [para. 107, footnote 48].

Dumbell v. Roberts, [1944] 1 All E.R. 326 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 107, footnote 48].

Walters v. Smith (W.H.) & Sons Ltd., [1914] 1 K.B. 595, refd to. [para. 107, footnote 48].

Alberta (Minister of Justice) et al. v. Cardinal et al. (2013), 565 A.R. 271; 2013 ABQB 407, refd to. [para. 108, footnote 51].

R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295; 58 N.R. 81; 60 A.R. 161, refd to. [para. 108, footnote 51].

O'Hara v. Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary, [1997] A.C. 286 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 109, footnote 52].

R. v. Loewen (D.J.) (2008), 461 A.R. 193; 2008 ABQB 660, affd. (2010), 490 A.R. 72; 497 W.A.C. 72; 260 C.C.C.(3d) 296 (C.A.), affd. [2011] 2 S.C.R. 167; 415 N.R. 397; 502 A.R. 3; 517 W.A.C. 3, refd to. [para. 111, footnote 53].

Mugesera et al. v. Canada (Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l'Immigration), [2005] 2 S.C.R. 91; 335 N.R. 220, refd to. [para. 112, footnote 56].

Southam Inc. v. Hunter, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145; 55 N.R. 241; 55 A.R. 291, refd to. [para. 112, footnote 57].

Brinegar v. United States of America (1949), 338 U.S. 160, refd to. [para. 112, footnote 57].

R. v. Kang-Brown (G.), [2008] 1 S.C.R. 456; 373 N.R. 67; 432 A.R. 1; 424 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 114, footnote 58].

R. v. Mann (P.H.), [2004] 3 S.C.R. 59; 324 N.R. 215; 187 Man.R.(2d) 1; 330 W.A.C. 1, refd to. [para. 114, footnote 58].

R. v. Grotheim (K.), [2002] 2 W.W.R. 49; 213 Sask.R. 141; 260 W.A.C. 141 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 114, footnote 58].

Holgate-Mohammed v. Duke, [1984] A.C. 437 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 114, footnote 58].

Hyder v. Australia (Commonwealth), [2012] NSWCA 336, refd to. [para. 114, footnote 58].

Gerstein v. Pugh (1975), 420 U.S. 103, refd to. [para. 114, footnote 58].

Terry v. Ohio (1968), 392 U.S. 1, refd to. [para. 114, footnote 58].

R. v. Briggs (W.) (2001), 149 O.A.C. 244; 157 C.C.C.(3d) 38 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 115, footnote 59].

Cloutier v. Langlois and Bédard, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 158; 105 N.R. 241; 30 Q.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 115, footnote 59].

Union Pacific Railway Co. v. Botsford (1891), 141 U.S. 250, refd to. [para. 115, footnote 59].

Entick v. Carrington (1765), 95 E.R. 807, refd to. [para. 115, footnote 60].

R. v. Clayton (W.) et al. (2005), 196 O.A.C. 16; 194 C.C.C.(2d) 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 117, footnote 66].

R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103; 65 N.R. 87; 14 O.A.C. 335, refd to. [para. 120, footnote 74].

Woolmington v. Director of Prosecutions, [1935] A.C. 462 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 120, footnote 74].

Briginshaw v. Briginshaw (1938), 68 C.L.R. 336 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 120, footnote 74].

Davis v. United States of America (1895), 160 U.S. 469, refd to. [para. 120, footnote 74].

Commonwealth v. Koczwara (1959), 155 A.2d 825 (Pa.), refd to. [para. 120].

Speiser v. Randall (1958), 357 U.S. 513, refd to. [para. 121, footnote 75].

R. v. Flight (R.I.) (2014), 575 A.R. 297; 612 W.A.C. 297; 2014 ABCA 185, refd to. [para. 123, footnote 78].

Wiltshire v. Barrett, [1965] 2 All E.R. 271 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 123, footnote 79].

United States of America v. Valencia-Amezcua (2002), 278 F.3d 901 (9th Cir.), refd to. [para. 123, footnote 79].

Smith, Hogg & Co. v. Black Sea and Baltic General Insurance Co., [1940] A.C. 997 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 124, footnote 81].

Maryland v. Pringle (2003), 540 U.S. 366, refd to. [para. 125].

Florida v. Harris (2013), 133 S. Ct. 1050, refd to. [para. 125].

Ornelas v. United States of America (1996), 517 U.S. 690, refd to. [para. 125].

RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311; 164 N.R. 1; 60 Q.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 127, footnote 83].

Porochnavy v. Scheie, [2014] A.R. Uned. 360; 2014 ABQB 316, refd to. [para. 127, footnote 83].

United States of America v. Cortez (1981), 449 U.S. 411, refd to. [para. 127].

Illinois v. Gates (1983), 462 U.S. 213, refd to. [para. 128, footnote 85].

R. v. Biron, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 56; 4 N.R. 45, refd to. [para. 128, footnote 86].

United States of America v. Lopez (1971), 328 F. Supp. 1077, refd to. [para. 130, footnote 88].

F.H. v. McDougall, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 41; 380 N.R. 82; 260 B.C.A.C. 74; 439 W.A.C. 74, refd to. [para. 131, footnote 89].

Dalton Cartage Co. v. Continental Insurance Co. and St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co., [1982] 1 S.C.R. 164; 40 N.R. 135, refd to. [para. 131, footnote 89].

Scott v. Cresswell (1975), 56 D.L.R.(3d) 268 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 131, footnote 89].

Steadman v. Steadman, [1974] 2 All E.R. 977 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 131, footnote 89].

United States of America v. Schipani (1968), 289 F. Supp. 43, refd to. [para. 131, footnote 89].

Mugesera et al. v. Canada (Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l'Immigration), [2005] 2 S.C.R. 100; 335 N.R. 229, refd to. [para. 133, footnote 93].

Mallory v. United States of America (1957), 354 U.S. 449, refd to. [para. 133, footnote 93].

Henry v. United States of America (1959), 361 U.S. 98, refd to. [para. 133, footnote 93].

R. v. Navales (E.J.) (2014), 569 A.R. 203; 606 W.A.C. 203; 2014 ABCA 70, refd to. [para. 133].

Hill et al. v. Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board et al., [2007] 3 S.C.R. 129; 368 N.R. 1; 230 O.A.C. 260, refd to. [para. 134, footnote 94].

Koechlin v. Waugh (1957), 11 D.L.R.(2d) 447; 118 C.C.C. 24 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 134, footnote 95].

Leigh v. Cole (1853), 6 Cox C.C. 329 (K.B.), refd to. [para. 134, footnote 95].

Caie v. New Zealand (Attorney General), [2001] NZHC 259, refd to. [para. 139, footnote 101].

R. v. Simmons, [1988] 2 S.C.R. 495; 89 N.R. 1; 30 O.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 139, footnote 102].

Alabama v. White (1990), 496 U.S. 325, refd to. [para. 139, footnote 102].

Texas v. Brown (1983), 460 U.S. 730, refd to. [para. 139, footnote 102].

Hill v. California (1971), 401 U.S. 797, refd to. [para. 139, footnote 102].

United States of America v. Garcia (1999), 179 F.3d 265 (5th Cir.), refd to. [para. 139, footnote 102].

United States of America v. Ortiz (2012), 669 F.3d 439 (4th Cir.), refd to. [para. 139, footnote 102].

Wilson v. Russo (2000), 212 F.3d 781 (3rd Cir.), refd to. [para. 139, footnote 102].

R. v. MacDonald (E.), [2014] 1 S.C.R. 37; 453 N.R. 1; 341 N.S.R.(2d) 353; 1081 A.P.R. 353, refd to. [para. 139, footnote 103].

R. v. Hall (R.) (1995), 79 O.A.C. 24; 22 O.R.(3d) 289 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 139, footnote 103].

R. v. Monney (I.), [1999] 1 S.C.R. 652; 237 N.R. 157; 119 O.A.C. 272, refd to. [para. 139, footnote 103].

R. v. Mayor (J.D.), [2013] A.R. Uned. 632; 2013 ABQB 598, refd to. [para. 141, footnote 106].

United States of America v. Humpries (2004), 372 F.2d 653 (4th Cir.), refd to. [para. 141, footnote 106].

Baron et al. v. Minister of National Revenue et al., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 416; 146 N.R. 270, refd to. [para. 141, footnote 108].

Hicks v. Faulkner (1878), 8 Q.B.D. 167, refd to. [para. 141, footnote 108].

R. v. Crowther (D.W.) (2013), 343 B.C.A.C. 127; 586 W.A.C. 127; 2013 BCCA 364, refd to. [para. 142].

Draper v. United States of America (1959), 358 U.S. 307, refd to. [para. 142].

Wong v. Toronto Police Services Board et al., [2009] O.T.C. Uned. S93; 2009 CarswellOnt 7412 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 153, footnote 112].

Wong v. Kryiacou - see Wong v. Toronto Police Services Board et al.

McCardle v. Egan, [1933] All E.R. 611; 150 L.T.R. 412 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 153, footnote 112].

Devenpeck v. Alford (2004), 543 U.S. 146, refd to. [para. 153, footnote 112].

Horton v. California (1990), 496 U.S. 128, refd to. [para. 154, footnote 115].

Nelles v. Ontario et al., [1989] 2 S.C.R. 170; 98 N.R. 321; 35 O.A.C. 161, refd to. [para. 156].

Hussien v. Chong Fook Kam, [1970] A.C. 942 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 159, footnote 117].

Mackey v. Montrym (1979), 443 U.S. 1, refd to. [para. 164, footnote 120].

R. v. Roks (A.) (2011), 281 O.A.C. 235; 2011 ONCA 526, refd to. [para. 164, footnote 122].

R. v. Jacques (J.R.) and Mitchell (M.M.), [1996] 3 S.C.R. 312; 202 N.R. 49; 180 N.B.R.(2d) 161; 458 A.P.R. 161, refd to. [para. 166, footnote 124].

Lister v. Perryman (1870), L.R. 4 H.L. 521, refd to. [para. 170, footnote 128].

Maxwell v. Wal-Mart Canada Corp. et al. (2013), 573 A.R. 123; 2013 ABQB 625, refd to. [para. 173, footnote 131].

Kellman v. Iverson et al., [2012] O.T.C. Uned. 3244; 2012 ONSC 3244, refd to. [para. 173, footnote 131].

Lawrence v. Peel Regional Police Force et al., [2009] O.T.C. Uned. 945 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 173, footnote 131].

Wiles v. Police Complaints Commissioner, [1997] O.J. No. 6274 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 173, footnote 131].

Trudgian v. Bosche, [2004] 1 W.W.R. 324; 235 Sask.R. 16 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 173, footnote 131].

G.I.M. v. Haggerty et al., [2008] O.T.C. Uned. 18; 2008 CarswellOnt 7 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 174, footnote 134].

Collis v. Toronto Police Services Board et al. (2007), 228 O.A.C. 333 (Div. Ct.), refd to. [para. 174, footnote 134].

P.H.E. v. Ottawa-Carleton Regional Police Service et al., [2003] O.T.C. 811; 2003 CarswellOnt 3402 (Sup. Ct.), refd to. [para. 174, footnote 134].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 495 [para. 24].

Rules of Court (Alta.), rule 7.3 [paras. 10, 23].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Alberta, Law Reform Institute, Summary Disposition of Actions, Consultation Memorandum No. 12.12 (August 2004), p. xv [para. 86, footnote 32].

Asprey, M., Plain Language for Lawyers (4th Ed. 2010), p. 140 [para. 173, footnote 133].

Bacigal, Ronald, Making the Right Gamble: The Odds on Probable Cause (2004), 74 Miss. L.J. 279, pp. 282 to 283 [para. 128, footnote 86]; 334 [para. 144, footnote 109].

Barrett, Edward, Jr., Police Practices and the Law - From Arrest to Release or Charge (1962), 50 Calif. L. Rev. 11, p. 14 [para. 119, footnote 73].

Bryant, Alan W., Lederman, Sidney N., and Fuerst, Michelle K., Sopinka, Lederman & Bryant: The Law of Evidence in Canada (3rd Ed. 2009), p. 204 [para. 131, footnote 89].

Canadian Bar Association, Report of the Task Force on Systems of Civil Justice (1996), pp. 15 to 16 [para. 73, footnote 15]; 41 [para. 88].

Colb, Sherry, Probabilities in Probable Cause and Beyond: Statistical Versus Concrete Harms (2010), 73 Law and Contemp. Prob. 69, pp. 69 to 73 [para. 133]; 71 to 72 [para. 157, footnote 116]; 73 [para. 114, footnote 58].

Coughlan, Steve, and Luther, Glen, Detention and Arrest (2010), pp. 1 [para. 122, footnote 77]; 76 to 78 [para. 141]; 78 to 80 [para. 158]; 80 [para. 153; footnote 111].

Galanter, Marc, The Vanishing Trial: An Examination of Trials and Related Matters in Federal and State Courts (2004), 1 J. Empirical Legal Stud. 459, pp. 459 to 460 [para. 73, footnote 15]; 483 [para. 75, footnote 16].

Hall, Jerome, Legal and Social Aspects of Arrest Without a Warrant (1936), 49 Harv. L. Rev. 566, pp. 566 [para. 134, footnote 95]; 586 [para. 117, footnote 66]; 588 [para. 115, footnote 59]; 589 [para. 118, footnote 70].

Issacharoff, Samuel, and Lowenstein, George, Second Thoughts About Summary Judgment (1990), 100 Yale L.J. 73, p. 74 [para. 88, footnote 36].

Kerr, Orin, Why Courts Should not Quantify Probable Cause, George Washington University Public Law and Legal Theory Paper No. 543 (March 27, 2011), generally [para. 124, footnote 81].

LaFave, Wayne, Arrest: The Decision to Take a Suspect into Custody (1965), pp. 248 [para. 171; footnote 130]; 249 [para. 122, footnote 77]; 250 [para. 153, footnote 112]; 251 [para. 159, footnote 117].

LaFave, Wayne, Search and Seizure: A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment (5th Ed. 2012), vol. 2, p. 84 [paras. 126, 157, footnote 116].

Leigh, Leonard, Police Powers in England and Wales (1975), p. 62 [para. 153, footnote 112].

Louis, Martin, Federal Summary Judgment Doctrine: A Critical Analysis (1974), 83 Yale L.J. 745, p. 769 [para. 88, footnote 36].

McCauliff, C.M.A., Burdens of Proof: Degree of Belief, Quanta of Evidence, or Constitutional Guarantees? (1982), 35 Vand. L. Rev. 1293, pp. 1302 [para. 124, footnote 81]; 1302, fn. 45 [para. 141, footnote 106]; 1304 [para. 122, footnote 76]; 1309 [para. 132, footnote 91]; 1332 [para. 139; footnote 99]; 1335 [para. 128, footnote 85].

Millar, Robert, Three American Ventures in Summary Civil Procedure (1928), 38 Yale L.J. 193, generally [para. 88, footnote 37].

Ontario Law Reform Commission, Rethinking Civil Justice: Research Studies for the Civil Justice Review (1996), vol. 1, p. 127 [para. 73, footnote 15].

Packer, Herbert, Two Models of Criminal Process (1964), 113 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1, p. 26 [para. 141, footnote 107].

Penney, S., Rondinelli, V., and Stribopoulos, J., Criminal Procedure in Canada (2011), pp. 127 to 128 [para. 156].

Redish, Martin, Summary Judgment and the Vanishing Trial: Implications of the Litigation Matrix (2005), 57 Stan. L. Rev. 1329, pp. 1335 [para. 88, footnote 36]; 1339 [para. 75, footnote 18]; 1356 [para. 124, footnote 81].

Rothstein, Linda, Centa, Robert, and Adams, Eric, Balancing Probabilities: The Overlooked Complexity of the Standard of Proof, in Special Lectures of the Law Society of Upper Canada 2003: The Law of Evidence (2004), p. 459 [para. 131, footnote 89].

Sankoff, Peter, and Perrault, Stéphanie, Suspicious Searches: What's So Reasonable About Them (1999), 24 C.R.(5th) 123, p. 126 [para. 122, footnote 76].

Simmons, David, Jacobs, Stephen, O'Malley, Daniel, and Tami, Richard, The Celotex Trilogy Revisited: How Misapplication of the Federal Summary Judgment Standard Is Undermining the Seventh Amendment Right to a Jury Trial (2006), 1 Fla. A. & M.U.L. Rev. 1, p. 3 [para. 75, footnote 16].

Starkie, T., Practical Treatise of the Law of Evidence (8th Am. Ed. 1860), p. 724 [para. 122, footnote 76].

Stevenson, William A., and Côté, Jean E., Alberta Civil Procedure Handbook (2010), pp. 7 to 11 [para. 75, footnote 18].

Twohig, John, Baar, Carl, Myers, Anna, and Predko, Anne Marie, Empirical Analyses of Civil Cases Commenced and Cases Tried in Toronto 1973-1994, in Ontario Law Reform Commission, Rethinking Civil Justice: Research Studies for the Civil Justice Review (1996), vol. 1, p. 127 [para. 73, footnote 15].

Welsh, Michael, Judging the Summary Trial Rule (1986), 44 The Advocate 173, pp. 174 [para. 88, footnote 34]; 176, 179 [para. 88].

Williams, Glanville, The Mathematics of Proof-1, [1979] Crim. L. Rev. 297, generally [para. 141, footnote 106]; pp. 340, 353 [para. 124, footnote 81].

Yungwirth, Debbie, Summary Trials in Family Law: A Reasonable Alternative (2012), p. 17 [para. 88, footnote 38].

Counsel:

N.D. Anderson and C.K. Jones, for the appellant/plaintiff;

S.H.D. Bower, for the respondents/defendants.

This appeal was heard on May 6, 2014, before Conrad, O'Brien and Wakeling, JJ.A., of the Alberta Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal delivered a memorandum of judgment on October 10, 2014, including the following opinions:

Conrad and O'Brien, JJ.A. - see paragraphs 1 to 12;

Wakeling, J.A. - see paragraphs 13 to 175.