Dégarie v. Canada

(1997), 141 F.T.R. 142, [1997] F.C.J. No.947 (F.C.T.D.)

    D was placed in voluntary segregation in Block L of the Port-Cartier Institution, which was comprised of a regular population area along with the segregation area. While D was in voluntary segregation, the decision was made to transfer him involuntarily from L Block to the S Block segregation area since there were several facts suggesting that D had provoked a number of inmates in the L area, and since D had been identified as having exploited certain residents in L Block. The S Block area was such that contact with the regular population was very limited. D sought judicial review of this "transfer" from one segregation unit to another.
    In dismissing the application, Richard J., referring to the decision in Camphaug v Canada (1990), 34 F.T.R. 165 (FCTD), asserted that fairness does not require that the inmate be given all of the particulars of all alleged wrongdoings. It is sufficient if he can make representations to demonstrate that the recommendation that he be moved is an unreasonable one. Here, D was adequately informed of the reasons for the decision and he was therefore in a position to reply to them or to oppose the decision. Further, there was a lawful exercise of the discretion granted to the warden of the institution which cannot be contested unless there is evidence that it was imposed unfairly. This decision was made in order to guarantee the safety of other inmates and the proper functioning of the Institution, in accordance with subsection 31(3) of the CCRA. Richard J. also held that since both units offered the same services, conditions and rights and privileges no remedy could be available under s24(1) of the Charter. The inmate's constitutional rights were not infringed. D applied for judicial review while several grievances had reached the third level and had not yet been disposed of. Although internal remedies had not been exhausted, the Court heard the application and ultimately dismissed it. The Court asserted that it need not express an opinion concerning the grievances that were pending during trial.
TOP