Ottawa, Ontario, March 28, 2006
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Martineau
BETWEEN:
and
CORRECTIONAL SERVICE OF CANADA
INSTITUTIONAL HEAD OF WARKWORTH INSTITUTION
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] The Plaintiff is an inmate in Warkworth Institution, a penitentiary under the management and control of Correctional Service of Canada (CSC). He is currently incarcerated for an indeterminate period as a dangerous offender, having been convicted of two counts of sexual assault causing bodily harm and two counts of overcoming resistance to commit an offence by administering a drug.
[2] The Plaintiff is required under a Warrant Remanding a Prisoner issued by a Justice of the Peace for Ontario to attend in Provincial Court in Ottawa at 9:00 a.m. on March 30, 2006 to answer to charges against him under the Criminal Code. This means that, in the meantime, the Plaintiff shall be transferred from Warkworth Institution to the Assessment Unit of Millhaven Institution where the Ontario Ministry of Public Safety and Security Offices will then take custody of him for transportation to such provincial jail as may be required. In this case, the jail is Ottawa Detention Centre.
[3] By the present motion for an interim injunction which was heard by the Court on March 28, 2006 on an urgent basis, the Plaintiff seeks an order preventing the Defendant from turning him over to the Ontario Ministry of Public Safety and Security for transportation to Ottawa for his Court appearance on March 30, 2006, and to the Ontario Ministry of Community Safety and Corrections (Corrections Ontario) for incarceration at the Ottawa Detention Centre pending the disposition of the new charges against him. Indeed, the Plaintiff asks that any requirement for Court appearance, including the provincial court appearance on March 30, 2006, be facilitated by the Warkworth Institution escort team.
[4] The present motion appears to be based upon general allegations that the Plaintiff's rights under sections 7 and 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were or will be breached by someone, who is not identified, or that CSC officials failed in their duties when the Plaintiff was transferred to the Ottawa Detention Centre for a Court attendance in relation to these charges in November of 2005.
[5] The Defendant does not contest the fact that health matters are serious and that CSC must take into consideration the Plaintiff's state of health and health care needs. According to the evidence submitted by the Defendant, CSC has established and maintains what is referred to as the community standard for health care for inmates. Indeed, it is both the normal and the required practice for CSC to prepare a Health Status Summary for each inmate required to transit between Federal institutions and Provincial corrections facilities. This has been done here and the Provincial authorities are fully aware of the Plaintiff's health condition and particular medication needs.
[6] The Court is not in a position to determine today whether or not the Warkworth Institution Health Care Unit failed in November 2005, as alleged by the Plaintiff in his Statement of Claim, to notify the Ottawa Detention Centre of the Plaintiff's type 2 diabetes condition. This is a contested matter which will have to be addressed later on in this proceeding in which the Plaintiff, in addition to an interlocutory and permanent injunction, is also seeking damages for physical, emotional and psychological harm, and punitive damages from the Crown. The evidentiary record for the adjudication of an interlocutory injunction is not complete and the time period for the filing of the Defendant's defence has not expired.
[7] Irrespective of the seriousness of the matters raised in the Statement of Claim, the relevant issue, at present time, is that the Plaintiff's medical condition has been assessed and is currently under control. Indeed, according to the evidence submitted by the Defendant, the Plaintiff is, at this time, considered to be fit to travel to the Provincial Detention Facility of Ottawa for his pending Court appearance scheduled for March 30, 2006. Moreover, the Defendant was advised, on March 23, 2006, that the Health Care Department of the Ottawa Detention Centre will be able to attend to his medical needs and that its institution physician, Dr. Robert Taite, will be the prescribing physician.
[8] At this point, the evidence simply fails to establish that the Plaintiff will suffer irreparable harm if his transfer to the provincial facilities takes place as presently scheduled. Moreover, according to the evidence submitted by the Defendant, inmates are not generally transported to or returned from court provincially operated regional detention centres for weekly remands, but are held by regional detention centres until the conclusion of court proceedings.
[9] The conditions for the granting of an interlocutory injunction, that is, a serious issue to be tried, the existence of irreparable harm and the balance in convenience in favour of the Plaintiff, are conjunctive. Accordingly, the present motion must fail.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that the motion for an interim injunction on an urgent basis be dismissed.
FEDERAL COURT
NAME OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-501-06
STYLE OF CAUSE: Ariel John Bellosillo v. Her Majesty the Queen et al.
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: March 28, 2006 by Motion 369 by Teleconference
APPEARANCES:
| Ariel John Bellosillo
|
REPRESENTING HIMSELF |
| Mr. James Gray
|
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
| Ariel John Bellosillo
|
REPRESENTING HIMSELF |
| John H. Sims, QC Deputy Attorney General of Canada
|