Lee v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police et al., (2000) 184 F.T.R. 74 (TD)
Judge | Campbell, J. |
Court | Federal Court (Canada) |
Case Date | May 16, 2000 |
Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
Citations | (2000), 184 F.T.R. 74 (TD) |
Lee v. RCMP (2000), 184 F.T.R. 74 (TD)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2000] F.T.R. TBEd. JL.085
Robert Arthur Lee (applicant) v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) and The Commissioner of The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, J.P.R. Murray (respondents)
(T-2181-99)
Indexed As: Lee v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police et al.
Federal Court of Canada
Trial Division
Campbell, J.
May 19, 2000.
Summary:
Lee held the rank of Corporal in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) when he pleaded guilty to two allegations of disgraceful conduct. As part of the sanction imposed by an Adjudicative Board, Lee was demoted to the rank of Constable. Lee appealed to the Commissioner of the RCMP. The Commissioner dismissed the appeal. Lee applied to set aside that part of the Commissioner's decision which confirmed the decision to demote him.
The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the application.
Civil Rights - Topic 5502
Equality and protection of the law - Whether right to equality abridged - Lee, a Corporal in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), pleaded guilty to two allegations of disgraceful conduct - Before the Adjudicative Board, Lee called evidence to support his assertion that at the time of his conduct he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) - As part of the sanction imposed by the Adjudicative Board, Lee was demoted to the rank of Constable - The Commissioner of the RCMP dismissed an appeal - Lee applied to set aside that part of the Commissioner's decision which confirmed the demotion, arguing that his equality rights under s. 15 of the Charter were offended because he was demoted because of his PSTD illness - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the application - The s. 15 argument was groundless where there was no evidence that Lee suffered any differential treatment - See paragraphs 11 to 12.
Evidence - Topic 7002
Opinion evidence - Expert evidence - General - Acceptance, rejection and weight to be given to expert opinion - [See Police - Topic 4172 ].
Police - Topic 4169
Internal organization - Discipline - Appeals - Grounds - General - [See Police - Topic 4172 ].
Police - Topic 4172
Internal organization - Discipline - Appeals - Evidence - Lee, a Corporal in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), pleaded guilty to two allegations of disgraceful conduct - While off duty, he had driven a police vehicle while impaired and had fled the scene of a police roadcheck and a subsequent accident - As part of the sanction imposed by an Adjudicative Board, Lee was demoted to the rank of Constable - The Commissioner of the RCMP dismissed an appeal - Lee applied to set aside that part of the Commissioner's decision which confirmed the demotion - He argued that the Commissioner's decision was patently unreasonable where the Commissioner found that post traumatic stress disorder "could have influenced" Lee's behaviour rather than finding that it "caused" the misconduct as was expressed in the medical opinion before the Adjudication Board - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the application - The Commissioner was entitled to assign weight to the expert opinion on the record - See paragraphs 9 to 10.
Cases Noticed:
Millard v. Canada (Attorney General) (2000), 253 N.R. 187 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 8].
Counsel:
Catherine Crockett, for the applicant;
Jack Wright, for the respondents.
Solicitors of Record:
Karen F. Nordlinger & Associates, Vancouver, British Columbia, for the applicant;
Morris Rosenberg, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondents.
This application was heard on May 16, 2000, at Vancouver, British Columbia, before Campbell, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following decision on May 19, 2000.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kinsey v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., 2007 FC 543
...(Solicitor General) et al. (2003), 241 F.T.R. 281; 2003 FC 1250, refd to. [para. 46]. Lee v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police et al. (2000), 184 F.T.R. 74 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Ryan v. Law Society of New Brunswick, [2003] 1 S.C.R. 247; 302 N.R. 1; 257 N.B.R.(2d) 207; 674 A.P.R. 207, refd to.......
-
Canada (Attorney General) v. Zalys, 2020 FCA 81
...Mounted Police, 2007 FC 29, 155 A.C.W.S. (3d) 202 (naming the RCMP as respondent); Lee v. Canada (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) (2000), 184 F.T.R. 74, [2000] F.C.J. No. 887 (QL) (F.C.T.D.) (naming Her Majesty the Queen (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) and RCMP Commissioner Murray as respond......
-
Gordon v. Canada (Solicitor General) et al., 2003 FC 1250
...(F.C.A.), leave to appeal dismissed (2001), 267 N.R. 195 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 19]. Lee v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police et al. (2000), 184 F.T.R. 74 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Canada Safeway Ltd. v. Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, Local 454 and Hardy, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 1079; 2......
-
Kinsey v. Canada (Attorney General) et al., 2007 FC 543
...(Solicitor General) et al. (2003), 241 F.T.R. 281; 2003 FC 1250, refd to. [para. 46]. Lee v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police et al. (2000), 184 F.T.R. 74 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Ryan v. Law Society of New Brunswick, [2003] 1 S.C.R. 247; 302 N.R. 1; 257 N.B.R.(2d) 207; 674 A.P.R. 207, refd to.......
-
Canada (Attorney General) v. Zalys, 2020 FCA 81
...Mounted Police, 2007 FC 29, 155 A.C.W.S. (3d) 202 (naming the RCMP as respondent); Lee v. Canada (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) (2000), 184 F.T.R. 74, [2000] F.C.J. No. 887 (QL) (F.C.T.D.) (naming Her Majesty the Queen (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) and RCMP Commissioner Murray as respond......
-
Gordon v. Canada (Solicitor General) et al., 2003 FC 1250
...(F.C.A.), leave to appeal dismissed (2001), 267 N.R. 195 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 19]. Lee v. Royal Canadian Mounted Police et al. (2000), 184 F.T.R. 74 (T.D.), refd to. [para. Canada Safeway Ltd. v. Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, Local 454 and Hardy, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 1079; 2......