Case information
Conduct a refined search of the Supreme Court of Canada database to obtain details on the status of a matter before the Court.
36621
Staff Sergeant Walter Boogaard v. Attorney General of Canada
(Federal) (Civil) (By Leave)
Docket
Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.
| Date | Proceeding | Filed By (if applicable) |
|---|---|---|
| 2016-06-17 | Close file on Leave | |
| 2016-06-17 | Correspondence (sent by the Court) to, Respondent, cover letter regarding certificate of taxation, dated June 17, 2016. | |
| 2016-06-17 | Certificate of taxation issued to, Mr. Gregory S. Tzemenakis | |
| 2016-06-17 | Decision on the bill of costs, in the amount of $1,453.04, Reg | |
| 2016-06-17 | Submission of the bill of costs, Reg | |
| 2016-06-02 | Bill of costs, Completed on: 2016-06-02 | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2016-04-08 | Copy of formal judgment sent to Registrar of the Court of Appeal and all parties | |
| 2016-04-08 | Judgment on leave sent to the parties | |
| 2016-04-07 |
Judgment of the Court on the application for leave to appeal, The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, Number A-556-14, 2015 FCA 150, dated June 22, 2015, is dismissed with costs. Dismissed, with costs |
|
| 2016-02-22 | All materials on application for leave submitted to the Judges, Cro Wa Côt | |
| 2015-10-30 | Applicant's reply to respondent's argument, (Letter Form), Completed on: 2015-10-30 | Staff Sergeant Walter Boogaard |
| 2015-10-21 | Certificate (on limitations to public access) | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2015-10-21 | Respondent's response on the application for leave to appeal, (3 volumes), Completed on: 2015-10-21 | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2015-09-21 | Letter acknowledging receipt of a complete application for leave to appeal, File opened on 2015-09-21 | |
| 2015-09-21 | Certificate (on limitations to public access) | Staff Sergeant Walter Boogaard |
| 2015-09-21 | Book of authorities | Staff Sergeant Walter Boogaard |
| 2015-09-21 | Application for leave to appeal, Completed on: 2015-09-21 | Staff Sergeant Walter Boogaard |
Parties
Please note that in the case of closed files, the “Status” column reflects the status of the parties at the time of the proceedings. For more information about the proceedings and about the dates when the file was open, please consult the docket of the case in question.
Main parties
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Staff Sergeant Walter Boogaard | Applicant | Active |
v.
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Attorney General of Canada | Respondent | Active |
Counsel
Party: Staff Sergeant Walter Boogaard
Counsel
Bijon Roy
43 Florence Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 0W6
Telephone: (613) 237-4740
FAX: (613) 232-2680
Email: pchamp@champlaw.ca
Party: Attorney General of Canada
Counsel
Adrian Bieniasiewicz
234 Wellington Street
East Tower, Room 1129
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0H8
Telephone: (613) 957-4782
FAX: (613) 954-1920
Agent
50 O'Connor Street, Suite 500, Room 557
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0H8
Telephone: (613) 670-6290
FAX: (613) 954-1920
Email: christopher.rupar@justice.gc.ca
Summary
Keywords
None.
Summary
Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.
Labour relations — Royal Canadian Mounted Police — Promotions — Commissioner’s decision not to promote member — Whether the Federal Court of Appeal decision calls the integrity and fairness of the disciplinary and promotional system for Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers under the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. R-10, into question — Whether the Federal Court of Appeal erred in holding that it is acceptable for the RCMP Commissioner to make findings of serious misconduct against an officer for the purposes of promotions when those same allegations were discounted several years earlier by the relevant authorities for the purposes of discipline under the RCMP Act.
Staff Sergeant Boogaard, a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, has been seeking promotion for some time. It appears that he has been unsuccessful because of an incident in 2000 in which his gun was stolen by two women. After a disciplinary hearing based on an agreed statement of facts which reflected his version of events, Staff Sgt. Boogaard was reprimanded and ordered to forfeit five days’ pay. Subsequent to this incident, he was promoted within the non-commissioned ranks, and his record was described as “excellent and beyond reproach”. He passed the officer Candidate Program in 2005 and 2009, but his eligibility expired without receipt of a commission. A parallel grievance proceeding found that a harassment complaint filed by Staff Sgt. Boogaard had been investigated unreasonably and that gossip had prejudiced his chances for advancement. When the Deputy Commissioner advised Staff Sgt. Boogaard that there were continued concerns about the gun incident, he answered the Deputy Commissioner’s questions. However, when Staff Sgt. Boogaard challenged the Commissioner’s decision, the Commissioner indicated that he was unwilling to promote Staff Sgt. Boogaard because he was concerned about the women’s version of the events. Staff Sgt. Boogaard sought judicial review in the Federal Court. The Federal Court granted judicial review and set aside the Commissioner’s decision. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Federal Court, and dismissed the application for judicial review.
Lower court rulings
Federal Court
T-1548-13, 2014 FC 1113
Commissioner’s decision set aside; Commissioner directed to do as much as he can to enable the applicant’s promotion to the rank of inspector and that he not withhold his recommendation once a position becomes available to the applicant because of the circumstances surrounding the theft of the applicant’s firearm
Federal Court of Appeal
A-556-14, 2015 FCA 150
Appeal allowed; judgment of Federal Court set aside and application for judicial review dismissed
Memorandums of argument on application for leave to appeal
The memorandums of argument on an application for leave to appeal will be posted here 30 days after leave to appeal has been granted unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of the memorandum by filing out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a memorandum of argument or want to use a memorandum of argument, please contact the author of the memorandum of argument directly. Their name appears at the end of the memorandum of argument. The contact information for counsel is found in the “Counsel” tab of this page.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available
Related links
Factums on appeal
The factums of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here at least 2 weeks before the hearing unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of factums by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a factum or want permission to use a factum, please contact the author of the factum directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each factum.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available