|
B was involuntarily transferred from William Head Institution (medium security) to Kent Institution (maximum security) on the grounds of his alleged involvement in the assault of a fellow inmate and the murder of another. At the time the transfer was executed, the RCMP were in the process of investigating B’s involvement in the murder, although no charges had been laid. A Progress Summary Report indicated that for the two years B was at William Head, he was relatively non-problematic. B sought an order for relief in the nature of habeas corpus with certiorari in aid that would see him transferred back to William Head Institution from Kent. The issue before the Court: Was the conduct of the CSC patently unreasonable in the circumstances? B’s central argument was that the CSC failed to make additional investigations and answer more specifically the questions asked by him. The CSC argued that they took all the necessary factors into account, and acted fairly and reasonably. Bouck J. confirmed that certiorari to quash is a remedy in the nature of an order setting aside the decision of a tribunal and is not available to a provincial superior court where it is directed at a federal tribunal because the granting of such an order is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Federal Court. However, on an application for habeas corpus a court may inquire into the detention of a prisoner, determine whether it is lawful, and issue an order transferring that inmate back to the institution from which he came. Certiorari in aid is a remedy in the nature of an order allowing this court to make the remedy of habeas corpus more effective by requiring production of the record of the proceedings in the tribunal below. With that said, Bouck J. went on to review past case authority, examined the facts in this case, and held that the conduct of the CSC in replying to the evidence and B’s submissions was fair and reasonable in the circumstances. The petition was dismissed.
|
TOP