Connection
Latest news
Crown attorneys call on Manitoba government to help address ‘dangerously heavy caseloads’
The Manitoba Association of Crown Attorneys (MACA) is calling on the provincial government to help reduce mounting workloads that it says are making it difficult for prosecutors to meet their professional responsibilities. grievance it filed in April 2023. It says the grievance it filed back in April 2023 regarding 'dangerously heavy caseloads' won't be heard by an arbitrator until October 2025.
[ ...More ]Publication date : 2025-01-10
Preparing RCMP body-cam evidence for court will be monumental task, prosecutor says
The RCMP is phasing-in the use of body-worn cameras across the country and expects 90 per cent of frontline members to be wearing them within a year. Shara Munn, president of the New Brunswick Crown Prosecutors Association, said while the body-camera evidence will be great to have, it will also mean a huge influx of work for prosecutors.
[ ...More ]Publication date : 2025-01-06
N.L. government invests in 18 new Crown attorneys amid severe staffing crunch
Newfoundland and Labrador Justice Minister Bernard Davis announced Wednesday afternoon that the provincial government is investing nearly $24 million to improve the province's justice system.... The investment comes after CBC News reported in numerous stories that Crown attorneys in the province were "suffocating" from overwhelming workloads and a critical staffing shortage.
[ ...More ]Publication date : 2024-11-14
Newfoundland to add more Crown prosecutors
Newfoundland and Labrador has agreed to hire more Crown lawyers following cries of a shortage of prosecutors in the province. The “multi-year investment” will include the hiring of 18 new Crown lawyers, according to a news release.
[ ...More ]Publication date : 2024-11-13
Critical shortage of Crown attorneys has ‘gone on way too long’ and is hurting public safety
The Canadian Association of Crown Counsel, an umbrella group for thousands of Crown attorneys and government lawyers across the country is calling for a big boost in the number of provincial prosecutors in Newfoundland and Labrador.
[ ...More ]Publication date : 2024-11-13
Most criminal cases in Ontario now ending before charges are tested at trial
More than half of the criminal charges laid by police in Ontario never make it to trial, according to data from Statistics Canada. The numbers paint a troubling picture of the province’s justice system. More judges, staff, prosecutors and courtrooms needed, says Crown attorneys’ association.
[ ...More ]Publication date : 2024-11-12
<-- Back to archived news
Supreme Court decision could help former N.S. Crown lawyer sue Premier, ex-justice minister for libe
19-02-2020
The Supreme Court of Canada, in Ottawa, on Jan. 19, 2018. | THE CANADIAN PRESS
A Supreme Court of Canada decision could affect whether government lawyers can use confidential documents to defend their reputations if political bosses “throw them under the bus,” a law professor says.
The top court is to rule Thursday on whether it will hear an appeal of a case involving Alex Cameron, a former lawyer with the Nova Scotia Department of Justice seeking to sue Premier Stephen McNeil and the former justice minister for defamation.
Mr. Cameron has claimed the politicians libelled him by implying he acted without instruction in 2016 when he argued in court that the province didn’t have a legal duty to consult the Sipekne’katik band on a natural gas storage proposal.
The brief was denounced by Indigenous leaders for stating there was historical evidence of the band’s “submission” to the British Crown in 1760, in contrast to “unconquered peoples” in other treaties.
Mr. Cameron resigned in 2017 from his position at the Justice Department, where he’d been a key lawyer on Indigenous cases.
Andrew Flavelle Martin, an assistant law professor at Dalhousie University, said the case has implications for lawyers representing government.
“I think for government lawyers generally it’s very important … that politicians have to be very careful about essentially throwing their lawyers under the bus when it’s convenient,” Prof. Martin said.
“I think depending on what happens in this case, it’s going to send a very important message to government lawyers and to politicians.”
If the Supreme Court decides to hear the Nova Scotia’s government’s appeal, the judges could set a precedent on whether client-solicitor privilege applies in these kinds of cases.
However, if the top court declines to hear the appeal, it will mean Mr. Cameron can proceed with his libel lawsuit, which is expected to include documents revealing what instructions he received.
Mr. Cameron’s original July, 2016, brief was part of the government’s defence when the Sipekne’katik band sought to stay the provincial approval of a plan by Alton Gas to store natural gas in salt caverns near the Shubenacadie River.
Legal experts have called Mr. Cameron’s argument controversial, as the Supreme Court of Canada has already made clear the Crown generally has a duty to consult Indigenous peoples.
However, Prof. Martin says the issue shifted when political leaders publicly disavowed Mr. Cameron’s legal brief, and it now raises the question of ministerial responsibility for positions they’re supposed to oversee.
Mr. Cameron has won a series of court victories as he attempted to have solicitor-client privilege set aside so he could submit a libel suit. However, the documents have remained under wraps as the appeal continued, effectively preventing Mr. Cameron from proceeding with his case.
Justice John Murphy ruled in Mr. Cameron’s favour in October, 2017, in Nova Scotia Supreme Court, saying the politicians’ statements “clearly imply” Mr. Cameron acted without instructions or contrary to instructions.
The judge concluded, “the statements nullified confidentiality and ended the privilege which otherwise applied.” His decision was upheld in the Court of Appeal.
Bruce Outhouse, Mr. Cameron’s lawyer, said in a recent interview that if the Supreme Court of Canada denies leave to appeal, “then the information will become public, and Mr. Cameron will file a [libel] action in the usual way, and it will proceed in that fashion in the public domain.”
According to court documents submitted by Mr. Cameron, Mr. McNeil and former justice minister Dianne Whalen made comments to the media on Nov. 17, 2017, that suggested Mr. Cameron had made the arguments without their input.
The Premier told reporters in a media scrum that Mr. Cameron’s brief was “not what I believe,” and “I had no idea it was being put forward,” according to the court documents. Ms. Whalen added: “I can reiterate what the Premier said. [It] went beyond the position of government.”
Prof. Martin said there are typically required approvals for civil case lawyers such as Mr. Cameron to follow when they act for government. “From my experience in government, there are a number of layers of approvals that are necessary on a regular basis,” he said.
Eric Boucher, a member of the executive of the Canadian Association of Crown Counsel, said in an e-mail that government lawyers take the duty of client-solicitor privilege very seriously, and Mr. Cameron’s case is unusual.
“I think the real concern here is if it were revealed that the government in this case was indeed aware of the arguments Mr. Cameron was going to make in court, but having been caught off guard by an unanticipated public backlash, decided to deflect attention away from its own responsibility by making disparaging comments about its lawyer,” he wrote.
“Crown counsel strive every day to protect our respective provinces’ and country’s interests while trying to uphold the rule of law. It’s a difficult job and it would be very disheartening to learn that we couldn’t expect our employers’ support in return.”