Plamondon v. Canada (Attorney General)
Court headnote
Plamondon v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2001-02-16 Neutral citation 2001 FCT 77 File numbers T-144-01 Decision Content Date: 20010216 Docket: T-144-01 Reference: 2001 FCT 77 Ottawa, Ontario, February 16, 2001 Before: Pinard J. Between: Yves Plamondon Plaintiff - and - The Attorney General of Canada Defendant On amended notice of motion filed by the plaintiff on January 26, 2001 seeking a provisional remedy following his involuntary transfer from the Donnacona Institution, Quebec to the Atlantic Institution at Renous, New Brunswick. ORDER The plaintiff's motion is dismissed: costs to follow. YVON PINARD JUDGE Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a. Date: 20010216 Docket: T-144-01 Reference: 2001 FCT 77 Between: Yves Plamondon Plaintiff - and - The Attorney General of Canada Defendant REASONS FOR ORDER PINARD J. [1] By this motion the plaintiff, an inmate, is seeking an order to compel the responsible penitentiary authorities to return him to the Donnacona Institution, Quebec following his involuntary transfer to the Atlantic Institution at Renous, New Brunswick, until his application for judicial review seeking cancellation of the said transfer is heard. [2] This type of provisional remedy requested by the plaintiff can only be granted if he is able to show that he can make out a prima facie case, that he will suffer irreparable harm if the remedy is not granted and that the balance of convenience is in his …
Read full judgment
Plamondon v. Canada (Attorney General) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2001-02-16 Neutral citation 2001 FCT 77 File numbers T-144-01 Decision Content Date: 20010216 Docket: T-144-01 Reference: 2001 FCT 77 Ottawa, Ontario, February 16, 2001 Before: Pinard J. Between: Yves Plamondon Plaintiff - and - The Attorney General of Canada Defendant On amended notice of motion filed by the plaintiff on January 26, 2001 seeking a provisional remedy following his involuntary transfer from the Donnacona Institution, Quebec to the Atlantic Institution at Renous, New Brunswick. ORDER The plaintiff's motion is dismissed: costs to follow. YVON PINARD JUDGE Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a. Date: 20010216 Docket: T-144-01 Reference: 2001 FCT 77 Between: Yves Plamondon Plaintiff - and - The Attorney General of Canada Defendant REASONS FOR ORDER PINARD J. [1] By this motion the plaintiff, an inmate, is seeking an order to compel the responsible penitentiary authorities to return him to the Donnacona Institution, Quebec following his involuntary transfer to the Atlantic Institution at Renous, New Brunswick, until his application for judicial review seeking cancellation of the said transfer is heard. [2] This type of provisional remedy requested by the plaintiff can only be granted if he is able to show that he can make out a prima facie case, that he will suffer irreparable harm if the remedy is not granted and that the balance of convenience is in his favour (see Manitoba (A.G.) v. Metropolitan Stores Ltd., [1987] 1 S.C.R. 110). [3] Assuming, without deciding the point, that a prima facie case has been made out, I feel that the plaintiff was not able to meet the other two requirements of the test. [4] The evidence was that the effect of the plaintiff's transfer was to enable him to enter a regular prison population, whereas he was in involuntary administrative segregation at the Donnacona Institution. This situation certainly could not constitute "irreparable harm". On the remainder of the argument, the distance separating the plaintiff from his counsel and family, the fact that it was necessary for the plaintiff to adjust to a particular social life at his new place of detention and the plaintiff's needs relating to education in my opinion are only instances of inconvenience. [5] As to the balance of convenience, I feel this is clearly in favour of the defendant. The evidence was that the plaintiff was no longer [TRANSLATION] "integrable" into the regular population in the Donnacona Institution. I therefore agree with the defendant's view that as the correctional authorities had a duty to ensure that the inmate would develop in surroundings which were as free of limitations as possible it was within their powers to take him out of involuntary administrative segregation and allow him to re-enter a regular population in another institution. I also entirely agree with my brother Blais J., who in Teale v. Canada (Attorney General) (October 13, 2000), T-1846-00, wrote in his analysis of the balance of convenience test: [14] It is in the public interest that the Correctional Service be able to fulfil its mandate. [6] Accordingly, I must attach greater weight to the public interest than to the mere inconveniences described above by the plaintiff. [7] For all these reasons, the plaintiff's motion is dismissed: costs to follow. YVON PINARD JUDGE OTTAWA, ONTARIO February 16, 2001 Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a. FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD COURT No.: T-144-01 STYLE OF CAUSE: Yves Plamondon v. Attorney General of Canada PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec DATE OF HEARING: February 5, 2001 REASONS FOR ORDER BY: PINARD J. DATED: February 16, 2001 APPEARANCES: Daniel Rock FOR THE PLAINTIFF Sébastien Gagné FOR THE DEFENDANT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Rock, Vleminckx, Dury, Lanctôt et Associés FOR THE PLAINTIFF Montréal, Quebec Morris Rosenberg FOR THE DEFENDANT Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca