Litwack v. Commission Nationale des Liberations Conditionnelles, (1986) 1 F.T.R. 282 (TD)

• Judge: Walsh, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: February 18, 1986
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1986), 1 F.T.R. 282 (TD)

Litwack v. Nat. Parole Bd. (1986), 1 F.T.R. 282 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Harvey Litwack v. La Commission Nationale des Liberations Conditionnelles

(T-2080-85)

Indexed As: Litwack v. Commission Nationale des Liberations Conditionnelles

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Walsh, J.

February 27, 1986.

Summary:

The Parole Board attached a condition to a parolee's release that prohibited him from undertaking certain business activities. Subsequently, the parolee alleged that he had reformed and wishing to become involved in business activities, so he sought to have the condition changed. The Parole Board refused. The parolee applied for certiorari to quash the board's refusal based on s. 7 of the Charter (ie. that the board's refusal was so unreasonable that it deprived him of his life, liberty or security of the person contrary to the principles of fundamental justice). The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, allowed the parolee's application to quash.

Civil Rights - Topic 3151

Trials, due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal proceedings - Parole - Refusal to revoke or vary conditions - The Parole Board attached a condition to a parolee's release that prohibited him from undertaking certain business activities - Subsequently, the parolee alleged that he had reformed and wanted to undertake business activities - The Parole Board refused to change the condition - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, quashed the board's decision where the refusal was patently unreasonable and therefore contrary to s. 7 of the Charter, because there was every indication that he had reformed, the change was recommended by his parole officer and there was no evidence that the parolee had not reformed.

Civil Rights - Topic 8305

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Application of - Persons protected - Parolees - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, held that conditions placed on a parolee limiting his parole can be looked at to determine whether they are imposed in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice (Charter, s. 7) - See paragraph 14.

Criminal Law - Topic 5666

Punishments (sentence) - Imprisonment and parole - Parole - General - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, quashed a refusal by the Parole Board to change a condition attached to a parolee's release, where the refusal was so unreasonable that it violated s. 7 of the Charter.

Cases Noticed:

Reference Re Section 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act (B.C.) (1985), 63 N.R. 266, refd to. [para. 10].

Kane v. Board of Governors of the University of British Columbia (1980), 31 N.R. 214, refd to. [para. 10].

Blanchard v. Control Data Canada Limited, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 447; 55 N.R. 194, refd to. [para. 10].

Re Mia and Medical Services Commission of British Columbia (1985), 17 D.L.R.(4th) 385, refd to. [para. 10].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, sect. 7, sect. 12, sect. 24.

Counsel:

Appearances: Julius Grey, for the petitioner;

David Lucas, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Grey, Casgrain, Montreal, Quebec, for the petitioner;

F. Iacobucci, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General of Canada, for the respondent.

This application was heard at Montreal, Quebec, on February 18, 1986, before Walsh, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following decision on February 27, 1986: