Edwards v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., 2003 FC 1441

• Judge: von Finckenstein, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: December 04, 2003
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: 2003 FC 1441;(2003), 243 F.T.R. 144 (FC)

Edwards v. Can. (A.G.) (2003), 243 F.T.R. 144 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2004] F.T.R. TBEd. JA.001

Patrick Edwards (applicant) v. The Attorney General of Canada on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen, The Commissioner of Corrections Canada and The Warden of Joyceville Institution (respondent)

(T-2009-02; 2003 FC 1441)

Indexed As: Edwards v. Canada (Attorney General) et al.

Federal Court

von Finckenstein, J.

December 10, 2003.

Summary:

Edwards was an inmate at Joyceville Institution. A case management team concluded that Edwards should undergo a Specialized Sex Offender Assessment pursuant to s. 37 of the Commissioner's Standard Operating Practice (SOP) 700-04. Edwards refused to undergo the assessment. As a result, he was denied access to Prison Family Visits (PFVs) by three levels of prison management: the Warden, the Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner. Edwards applied for judicial review of the Commissioner's decision, raising two issues: (1) whether the requirement that a prisoner undergo an assessment as set out in s. 37 of SOP 700-04 was ultra vires the Corrections and Conditional Release Act; and (2) whether it was a proper exercise of the Commissioner's discretion to require that Edwards undergo a Specialized Sex Offender Assessment before being granted PFVs.

The Federal Court allowed the application and sent the matter back to the Commissioner for reconsideration. The court held that s. 37 of SOP 700-04 was intra vires the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. However, the court held that the Commissioner erred when she decided that it was a reasonable limit to require that Edwards successfully complete the sex offender assessment before being granted PFVs.

Prisons - Topic 1003

Administration - Commissioner's directives - General - Section 37 of the Commissioner's Standard Operating Practice (SOP) 700-04 provided that "The following offenders shall be referred for specialized sex offender assessment: Offenders whose current offence is a sexual offence; Offenders who have a history of sexual offences; Offenders whose current or past offences involved sexual offences, whether or not the latter resulted in conviction" - An inmate argued that s. 37 of SOP 700-04 was ultra vires the Corrections and Conditional Release Act as it allowed the Commissioner to take into consideration offences for which the inmate had not been convicted - The Federal Court held that s. 37 of SOP 700-04 was intra vires the Act - See paragraphs 14 to 18.

Prisons - Topic 1112

Administration - Prisoners' rights - Institutional visiting programs - Edwards was an inmate at Joyceville Institution - A case management team concluded that Edwards should undergo a Specialized Sex Offender Assessment pursuant to s. 37 of the Commissioner's Standard Operating Practice (SOP) 700-04 - As a result of his refusal to undergo the assessment, Edwards was denied access to Prison Family Visits (PFVs) by three levels of prison management: the Warden, the Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner - Edwards applied for judicial review of the Commissioner's decision - The Federal Court allowed the application - The Corrections and Conditional Release Act provided that Edwards had a right to PFVs subject only to reasonable limits - In the circumstances, the Commissioner erred when she decided that it was a reasonable limit to require that Edwards successfully complete the sex offender assessment before being granted PFVs - See paragraphs 20 to 29.

Prisons - Topic 1123

Administration - Prisoners' rights - Right to refuse treatment - [See Prisons - Topic 1112 ].

Cases Noticed:

Laliberté v. Commissaire du Service Correctionnel du Canada et al. (2000), 181 F.T.R. 276 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 4].

Counsel:

Brian A. Callender, for the applicant;

R. Jeff Anderson, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Brian A. Callender, Kingston, Ontario, for the applicant;

Morris Rosenberg, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent.

This application was heard on December 4, 2003, at Ottawa, Ontario, before von Finckenstein, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following decision on December 10, 2003.