Peeters v. Canada, (1993) 163 N.R. 209 (FCA)

• Judge: Heald, MacGuigan and Linden, JJ.A.
• Court: Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
• Case Date: October 26, 1993
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1993), 163 N.R. 209 (FCA)

Peeters v. Can. (1993), 163 N.R. 209 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada (appellant/defendant) v. Joseph Peeters (respondent/plaintiff)

(A-721-92)

Indexed As: Peeters v. Canada

Federal Court of Appeal

Heald, MacGuigan and Linden, JJ.A.

November 4, 1993.

Summary:

The plaintiff, a penitentiary inmate, sued the Crown for damages arising out of an assault inflicted upon him by Correctional Services personnel. The Crown admitted that the inmate was assaulted.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Divi­sion, in a decision reported 54 F.T.R. 289, assessed damages accordingly, including an award of $16,000 punitive damages. The Crown appealed the award of punitive dam­ages, arguing that punitive damages could be assessed only against the individual servants of the Crown involved in the assault, and not against the Crown itself.

The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Damage Awards - Topic 2011

Exemplary or punitive damages - Assault and battery - A penitentiary inmate was injured when he took his shop instructor hostage - Following the incident, the inmate was transported by ambulance to a nearby hospital - In the ambulance, he was assaulted by Correctional Services employees - In a suit against the federal Crown, the trial judge awarded, inter alia, $16,000 for punitive damages - The Fed­eral Court of Appeal affirmed that punitive damages could be awarded against the Crown, however, an employer was not vicariously liable for punitive damages unless there was some degree of blameworthiness on the part of the employer - Here the court affirmed the award where there was complicity on the Crown's part.

Damages - Topic 1302

Exemplary or punitive damages - Assault and battery - [See Damage Awards - Topic 2011 ].

Damages - Topic 1332

Exemplary or punitive damages - Vi­carious liability - The Federal Court of Appeal held that for the awarding of puni­tive damages against an employer (includ­ing the federal Crown) for the wrongful acts of an employee, there must have been at least some form or degree of complicity or blameworthiness on the part of the employer - See paragraphs 12 to 25.

Damages - Topic 1332.1

Exemplary or punitive damages - Liability of Crown - The Federal Court of Appeal affirmed that punitive damages may be awarded against the Crown (i.e. Her Maj­esty the Queen in right of Canada) - See paragraphs 8 to 11.

Damages - Topic 1332.1

Exemplary or punitive damages - Liability of Crown - [See Damage Awards - Topic 2011 and Damages - Topic 1332 ].

Cases Noticed:

LeBar v. Canada, [1989] 1 F.C. 603; 90 N.R. 5; 33 Admin. L.R. 107 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

Vorvis v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1085; 94 N.R. 321; 58 D.L.R.(4th) 193; [1989] 4 W.W.R. 218; 36 B.C.L.R.(2d) 273; 90 C.L.L.C. 14,035; 25 C.C.E.L. 81, refd to. [para. 16].

Rookes v. Barnard, [1964] A.C. 1129; [1964] 1 All E.R. 367 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 16].

Norberg v. Wynrib, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 226; 138 N.R. 81; 9 B.C.A.C. 1; 19 W.A.C. 1; 92 D.L.R.(4th) 449, refd to. [para. 22].

Swanson and Peever v. Canada, [1992] 1 F.C. 408; 124 N.R. 218; 80 D.L.R.(4th) 741 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

Evaniuk v. 79846 Manitoba Inc. (1990), 68 Man.R.(2d) 306 (Q.B.), dist. [para. 28].

Statutes Noticed:

Crown Liability Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-50, sect. 3, sect. 10, sect. 16, sect. 17, sect. 18, sect. 19, sect. 20 [para. 10].

Authors and Works Noticed:

American Law Institute, Restatement of the Law of Agency (2nd Ed.), s. 217C [para. 17, footnote 4].

American Law Institute, Restatement of the Law of Contracts (2nd Ed.), gen­erally [para. 16].

American Law Institute, Restatement of the Law of Torts (2nd Ed. 1979), § 909 [para. 17].

Chernick, Earl A., and Morse, Jerome R., Aggravated, Punitive and Exemplary Damages in Canada, in Special Lectures of the Law Society of Upper Canada, 1983: Torts in the 80's, pp. 151, 199 [para. 13].

Cooper-Stevenson, Kenneth D. and Saun­ders, Iwan B., Personal Injury Damages in Canada (1981), pp. 705 to 707 [para. 13].

Feldthusen, Bruce, Recent Developments in the Canadian Law of Punitive Dam­ages (1990), 16 Can. Bus. L.J. 241, generally [para. 9, footnote 1].

Linden, Canadian Tort Law (5th Ed. 1993), pp. 55, 56 [para. 9].

Ontario Law Reform Commission, Report on Exemplary Damages, pp. 3 [para. 9]; 57 [para. 13]; 85 [para. 21].

Waddams, S.M., The Law of Damages (2nd Ed. 1992), p. 11-23, para. 11,400, p. 11-25, para. 11,420 [para. 14].

Counsel:

Gilles Villeneuve, for the appellant;

Fergus J. O'Connor, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

John C. Tait, Q.C., Deputy Attorney Gen­eral of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the appellant;

O'Connor, Bailey & Napier, Kingston, Ontario, for the respondent.

The following judgment was heard in Ottawa, Ontario, on October 26, 1993, before Heald, MacGuigan and Linden, JJ.A., of the Federal Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered by MacGuigan, J.A., on November 4, 1993.