The Applicant police officer appealed from the decision of the Saskatchewan Police Commission (the “Commission”) which found the Applicant guilty of discreditable conduct and imposed a disciplinary penalty. The court made an order in the nature of certiorari and set aside the decision of the Police Commission because the Commissioner failed to comply with the imperative procedural requirements of the Police Act.

Administrative law – Judicial review – Procedural requirements – Statutory powers – Remedies – Certiorari – Police – Disciplinary proceedings – Privative clauses

Selinger v. Saskatchewan (Police Commission), [2002] S.J. No. 95, Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, February 5, 2002, Kyle, J.

The Commission made an order on May 22, 2001, dismissing the applicant’s appeal from the decision of a Hearing Officer which found the applicant guilty of neglect of duty, discreditable conduct and abuse of authority. The member applied to the Court for judicial review of the Commission’s’ decision. On review, the court noted that the Commission is exempted from certiorari proceedings by section 72 of the Police Act. The court held that such a prohibitive clause, however, is not effective in the prevention of a judicial review of a decision of the Commission that goes to jurisdiction. The Applicant argued that the hearing officer erred in failing to advise in writing the substance of the matter being investigated and to give notice that an investigation into the matter would be conducted. The Court held that in interpreting section 54(1) of the Police Act as directory rather than imperative, the police commissioner erred in interpretation and opened itself up to judicial review in spite of the prohibitive clause found in section 72. The court made an order in the nature of certiorari and set aside the decision of the Commission and of the Hearing Officer in respect of all charges which were the subject of judicial review.

To stay current with the new case law and emerging legal issues in this area, subscribe here.