Dupperon v. Can. (A.G.), [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. JL.057

• Judge: Gascon, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: May 07, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. JL.057;2015 FC 806

Dupperon v. Can. (A.G.), [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. JL.057

MLB being edited

Currently being edited for F.T.R. - judgment temporarily in rough form.

[English language version follows French language version]

[La version anglaise vient à la suite de la version française]

Temp. Cite: [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. JL.057

Stéphane Dupperon (demandeur) v. Procureur général du Canada (défendeur)

(T-1655-14; 2015 CF 806; 2015 FC 806)

Indexed As: Dupperon v. Canada (Attorney General)

Federal Court

Gascon, J.

June 29, 2015.

Summary:

The acting Senior Deputy Commissioner (the Commissioner) of the Correctional Service of Canada dismissed an inmate's third level grievance, affirming the refusal to grant the inmate private family visits (PFV) alone with his wife. Dupperon applied for judicial review, asserting that the decision was unreasonable, because the Commissioner acted contrary to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and Regulations by refusing his request in an arbitrary and unjustified manner. He asserted that the Commissioner violated his legal obligations by not suggesting less restrictive alternatives at the time of refusing his request. The inmate asserted that although the former Directive 770 and the new Directive 710-8 provided an exception to an inmate's right to be admitted to the PFV program where there was a risk of family violence, his June 2013 assessment did not show that he risked becoming involved in family violence and the decision was not justified, considering his record. The inmate also asserted that he was denied procedural fairness since the Commissioner failed to consider evidence and relied on information that was not reliable or persuasive. The inmate further asserted that the Commissioner did not sufficiently justify her decision.

The Federal Court dismissed the application. Given the inmate's record of violence, the impact of the new charges of sexual assault and the various assessments on the record, all together with the paramount question of public safety, the Commissioner's decision was sufficiently reasonable and the court should not intervene. The rules of procedural fairness were not breached.

Administrative Law - Topic 549

The hearing and decision - Decisions of the tribunal - Reasons for decisions - Sufficiency of - See paragraphs 47 to 60.

Administrative Law - Topic 2145

Natural justice - Administrative decisions or findings - Failure to consider evidence - See paragraphs 47 to 58.

Prisons - Topic 1112

Administration - Prisoner's rights - Institutional visiting  programs - See paragraphs 30 to 60.

Prisons - Topic 1122

Administration - Prisoner's rights - Right to a fair hearing - See paragraphs 47 to 60.

Prisons - Topic 1131

Administration - Prisoner's rights - Judicial review or grievance - See paragraphs 47 to 60.

Counsel:

Pierre Tabah, for the applicant;

Toni Abi Nasr, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Labelle, Côté, Tabah & Associés, Montreal, Quebec, for the applicant;

William F. Pentney, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Montreal, Quebec, for the respondent.

This application was heard at Montreal, Quebec, on May 7, 2015, by Gascon, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following judgment on June 29, 2015.