Case information

Constitutional law — Charter rights — Right to equality —Discrimination based on race — Systemic discrimination — Evidence — Admissibility — Standard of scrutiny — Distinction between systemic and individual discrimination — Procedural, evidentiary or legal implications flow from distinction — What evidence of systemic discrimination is relevant to, and therefore admissible in, claim of individual discrimination.

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.

Mr. Sidhu sought damages from the Attorney General on the basis that certain RCMP officers had racially-profiled him on three occasions: a roadside stop on December 2, 2012, an arrest on December 5, 2012, and a roadside stop on June 4, 2016. He claimed that animus against him developed in Watson Lake, Yukon, in the early 2000s, and transferred to Whitehorse. He said that the officers had violated his Charter rights, unlawfully arrested him, denied him access to counsel, assaulted him, and subjected him to malicious prosecution in the roadside checks and the arrest. He also argued that there was systemic racism towards him in the RCMP. He sought to introduce evidence of 32 interactions he had had with RCMP officers in Watson Lake and Whitehorse.

Wenckebach J. admitted evidence in relation to three interactions with the RCMP. She found that the evidence was meant to show a pattern of behaviour directed towards himself, which is not systemic discrimination. She found that Mr. Sidhu had not been unlawfully detained at roadside stops on December 2, 2012, or June 4, 2016. Nor had he been maliciously prosecuted.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Mr. Sidhu’s application to adduce fresh evidence and his appeal.