“In Ontario (Attorney General) v Clark (‘Clark’), the majority (8 judges) of the Supreme Court of Canada held that Crown immunity precludes claims based on misfeasance in public office. Justice Côté dissented. Here I consider the policy underpinnings and ramifications of the two opinions. Clark addressed only the question of whether the claim at issue, brought by police officers against the Crown attorneys in two cases in which the officers were involved, constituted a recognized cause of action …” (more)
[Patricia Hughes, Slaw, 8 June]
First posted 2021-06-08 16:00:56
Leave a Reply