Case information

Torts ? Harassment ? Intentional infliction of mental suffering ? Claims in damages for mental distress based on conduct alleged to amount to harassment and bullying in the employment context ? Whether recovery of damages for mental suffering from intentional and wrongful conduct should be under a single tort or separate torts of intentional infliction of mental suffering and harassment ? Does the tort of harassment exist? What threshold of conduct warrants the imposition of liability for damages for mental suffering arising in circumstances of intentional, wrongful conduct? What is the appropriate degree of mental culpability to give rise to liability for causing mental suffering arising out of circumstances of intentional, wrongful conduct? What are the appropriate criteria for establishing the existence of mental suffering sufficient to give rise to liability in circumstances of intentional, wrongful conduct? Should findings of fact and/or mixed fact and law based upon credibility findings be overturned on appeal where credibility findings have not been challenged? Under what circumstances, if any, may an appellate court re-weigh a trial judge’s balancing of evidence without reference to, and in a manner inconsistent with, substantial and uncontradicted trial evidence?

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.

The applicant, Mr. Peter Merrifield, has been a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) since 1998. In 2007, he commenced an action for damages against the Crown, on behalf of the RCMP, as well as against senior members of the RCMP including the respondents, Inspector James Jagoe and Superintendent Marc Proulx, for mental distress resulting from managerial harassment that occurred over a period of two years. The action for damages is based on a series of events that started in May 2005 when Mr. Merrifield decided to run as the Conservative Party’s candidate for an upcoming election without complying with the applicable RCMP regulations. The superior officers decided that Mr. Merrifield was potentially in a conflict of interest. As a result, he was transferred out the of RCMP’s Threat Assessment Group that he had joined in February 2005 to another unit. The Superior Court of Justice allowed the action. The trial judge recognized a new freestanding tort of harassment and also found that the respondents were liable for intentional inflection of mental suffering. The Court of Appeal set aside the trial judgment and found that the trial judge erred in recognizing a tort of harassment, erred in applying the test for the intentional infliction of mental suffering, and made palpable and overriding errors in much of her fact-finding. The Appeal was allowed and the cross-appeal for an increased damage award was dismissed.