FEDERAL COURT JURISDICTION
Motions to strike statement of claim for damages—Plaintiff, operating stolen RCMP vehicle, lost control, hit power pole, was struck by another RCMP vehicle and badly injured— Action as against Crown, police officers struck out as no amendment of statement of claim could assist plaintiff against them; defendant, RCMP Commissioner, unrepresented and remaining a defendant—Plaintiff asserting amputation of injured leg necessitated by delay in receiving medical treatment and due to being dragged through dirt by police resulting in dirt getting into open wounds—Incident took place at municipality of Penticton, where policing is provided by RCMP under contract between Canada and British Columbia, as authorized by Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, s. 20(1) and Police Act, s. 14(1)—Under Police Act, RCMP member discharging duties of provincial constable deemed to be provincial constable, protected by s. 21, which provides that no action claiming damages lies against police officer for anything done or omitted to be done in line of duty but, under s. 21(3), officer not afforded statutory immunity in case of gross negligence, malicious or wilful misconduct— Federal Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain claim against individual officers—ITO—International Terminal Operators Ltd. v. Miida Electronics Inc. et al., [1986] 1 S.C.R. 752, established three conditions for F.C. jurisdiction, second of which that there must be existing body of federal law essential to disposition of case and which nourishes statutory grant of jurisdiction—Here, cause of action negligence—In Arsenault v. Canada (1995), 131 D.L.R. (4th) 105 (F.C.T.D.), Wetston J. held that, while Crown Liability and Proceedings Act constituting body of existing federal law for actions against Crown, it stopped short of providing right of action against Crown servants—For them to be personally liable, they would have to be so under provincial law—Nor should amendment to pleadings be allowed to add Charter claim: Charter inapplicable as no act of government at issue—Plaintiff not pleading vicarious liability of Crown in Right of Canada for officers’ actions but Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, s. 3(a) provides for statutory liability of Crown for servants’ torts—But Crown liability depends on liability of servant: White v. Canada (1998), 152 F.T.R. 39 (F.C.T.D.)— Statement of claim not disclosing cause of action against Crown, in Federal Court, no negligence claim lying against officers—Plaintiff should have litigated in B.C. court—Police Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 367, ss. 14, 21 (as am. by S.B.C. 1997, c. 37, s. 22)—Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. R‑10, s. 20(1)—Crown Liability and Proceedings Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C‑50, ss. 1 (as am. by S.C. 1990, c. 8, s. 21), 3(a), 10—Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, being Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B, Canada Act 1982, 1982, c. 11 (U.K.) [R.S.C., 1985, Appendix II, No. 44].
Braybrook v. Canada (T‑2139‑03, 2005 FC 417, Hargrave P., order dated 24/3/05, 14 pp.)