Date: 20030224
Docket: A-75-02
Montréal, Quebec, February 24, 2003
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
NADON J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAOUL AUBERTIN
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
JUDGMENT
The appeal is dismissed with costs.
"Robert Décary"
J.A.
Certified true translation
Mary Jo Egan, LLB
Date: 20030224
Docket: A-75-02
Neutral Citation: 2003 FCA 100
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
NADON J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAOUL AUBERTIN
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on February 24, 2003.
Judgment delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on February 24, 2003.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NADON J.A.
Date: 20030224
Docket: A-75-02
Neutral Citation: 2003 FCA 100
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
NADON J.A.
BETWEEN:
RAOUL AUBERTIN
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
(Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec,
February 24, 2003.)
NADON J.A.
[1] We have not been persuaded that our intervention is warranted in this case.
[2] The appellant is challenging a decision of Mr. Justice Lemieux dated January 9, 2002, which concluded that his motion for an extension of time to file an application for judicial review of a decision by the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police dated September 4, 2001, should be dismissed, on the ground that the appellant had not shown that his application for judicial review had a chance of being allowed. In our view, Lemieux J. did not err in his conclusion.
[3] The appellant contends that he has a chance of success with respect to the sanction imposed by the Commissioner, namely, dismissal rather than an order to resign. In his decision, the Commissioner clearly indicated that the appellant's alleged actions were of such gravity that he should be dismissed. The Commissioner's remarks on this issue are found at pages 20 and 21 of his decision:
[TRANSLATION]
Regarding the events that were clearly described at the disciplinary hearing and in the ERC review, the fact that a member used his weapon in a threatening and inappropriate manner, committed assaults, accessed a confidential police information system for personal purposes and abused his position as a peace officer-this behaviour is extremely serious and completely unacceptable. The violence exhibited on numerous occasions by a person who should respect and enforce the law can only be treated in the most severe and expeditious manner, as prescribed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act.
I support the ERC's recommendation that the appeal concerning the allegations be dismissed. With respect to the sanction, I believe that the adjudication board correctly emphasized the seriousness of the offences, and I agree with its recommendation to dismiss Constable Aubertin immediately. I have stated my reasons for rejecting the ERC's recommendation to replace the sanction of immediate dismissal by a direction to resign from the RCMP within 14 days. The expectations that the public has about police officers in terms of professionalism, exemplary conduct and respect for everyone require that police management treat recurring behaviour, like Constable Aubertin's, with the utmost severity. Accordingly, I am rejecting the recommendation of the ERC as to the sanction and I order the immediate dismissal of Constable Aubertin.
[4] In light of the evidence, we cannot imagine how this conclusion by the Commissioner could be described as unreasonable.
[5] Accordingly, the appeal should be dismissed with costs.
"Marc Nadon"
J.A.
Montréal, Quebec
February 24, 2003
Certified true translation
Mary Jo Egan, LLB
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
APPEAL DIVISION
Date: 20030224
Docket: A-75-02
Between:
RAOUL AUBERTIN
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
OF THE COURT
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
APPEAL DIVISION
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: A-75-02
appeal from a judgment of the Trial Division dated January 9, 2002, in docket 01-T-62
CORAM: DÉCARY J.A.
NOËL J.A.
NADON J.A.
STYLE OF CAUSE: RAOUL AUBERTIN
Appellant
and
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: February 24, 2003
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NADON
DATED: February 24, 2003
APPEARANCES:
William De Merchant FOR THE APPELLANT
Raymond Piché FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Ouellet, Nadon et associés FOR THE APPELLANT
Montréal, Quebec
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Montréal, Quebec
Email this Content