Difference between revisions of "Course:Law3020/2014WT1/Group W"
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Plaintiff was shot while fleeing from a bank robbery, plaintiff’s family brought: | Plaintiff was shot while fleeing from a bank robbery, plaintiff’s family brought: | ||
| + | |||
1) action against police chief was allowed to proceed (tort of misfeasance in a public office) | 1) action against police chief was allowed to proceed (tort of misfeasance in a public office) | ||
| + | |||
2) action against Metropolitan Toronto Police Services Board was not (tort of misfeasance in a public office) | 2) action against Metropolitan Toronto Police Services Board was not (tort of misfeasance in a public office) | ||
| − | 3) action against the Province of Ontario was not (tort of misfeasance in a public office) | + | |
| − | for failing to ensure police officers involved were segregated, provided case notes, clothing and blood samples, and attended interviews with the SIU. | + | 3) action against the Province of Ontario was not (tort of misfeasance in a public office) for failing to ensure police officers involved were segregated, provided case notes, clothing and blood samples, and attended interviews with the SIU. |
Statement of claim alleges mental distress, anger, depression and anxiety as a consequence of the alleged misconduct, but the plaintiffs will have to prove at trial that the alleged misconduct caused anxiety or depression of sufficient magnitude to warrant compensation. | Statement of claim alleges mental distress, anger, depression and anxiety as a consequence of the alleged misconduct, but the plaintiffs will have to prove at trial that the alleged misconduct caused anxiety or depression of sufficient magnitude to warrant compensation. | ||
Revision as of 19:03, 9 February 2014
Odhavji Estate v. Woodhouse
Plaintiff was shot while fleeing from a bank robbery, plaintiff’s family brought:
1) action against police chief was allowed to proceed (tort of misfeasance in a public office)
2) action against Metropolitan Toronto Police Services Board was not (tort of misfeasance in a public office)
3) action against the Province of Ontario was not (tort of misfeasance in a public office) for failing to ensure police officers involved were segregated, provided case notes, clothing and blood samples, and attended interviews with the SIU.
Statement of claim alleges mental distress, anger, depression and anxiety as a consequence of the alleged misconduct, but the plaintiffs will have to prove at trial that the alleged misconduct caused anxiety or depression of sufficient magnitude to warrant compensation.