Bissonnette v. Canada ( Commissioner of Corrections )
T-2085-96
Lutfy J.
24/10/96
11 pp.
Application for judicial review of decision of respondent Warden of Frontenac Institution refusing approval for utilization of moneys from Inmate Welfare Fund for purpose of paying legal fees in another application for judicial review, under Court File T-2439-95, of decision by respondent Deputy Commissioner for Ontario to implement new telephone system in federal penitentiaries throughout province-Mandate of Inmate Committee within Frontenac Institution to represent best interest, welfare of inmate population and to act as liaison with administration-Inmate Welfare Fund used for sole benefit of Inmate Committee and collectivity of inmates at any given institution-Expenditures from Fund subject to Warden's approval-Warden refusing to approve payment of outstanding account of $300 to solicitor for applicants and share of retainer for future services from Inmate Welfare Fund-Commissioner's Directive No. 861 issued in May 1989 to set out policy objective, other relevant provisions concerning Inmate Welfare Fund-Whether Directive prohibits utilization of Inmate Welfare Fund at Frontenac Institution for payment of applicants' solicitor's legal fees in proceeding against respondents concerning new telephone system-Fund exists for purpose of contributing to inmates' general welfare within institution-Wording of Directive not necessarily prohibiting funding of legal actions in within application-Directive must be read, implemented within framework of Corrections and Conditional Release Act and Regulations-Request to use Inmate Welfare Fund, moneys collected from inmates themselves, must be considered by Warden within context of Service's obligation to ensure every inmate has reasonable access to legal counsel-Assertion by Commissioner monies from Inmate Welfare Fund cannot be utilized for purpose of legal actions too broad as blanket statement in light of current Regulations-Warden erred in law in relying on Commissioner's interpretation and in refusing approval for utilization of Inmate Welfare Fund to pay legal fees for court challenge concerning new telephone system-Refusal inconsistent with Service's obligation to afford reasonable access to legal counsel in litigation where Court has ordered interlocutory relief on grounds new telephone system might infringe applicants' Charter rights-Application granted-Corrections and Conditional Release Act, S.C. 1992, c. 20-Corrections and Conditional Release Regulations, SOR/92-620.