THUNDER BAY — A statement of claim filed by a man alleging harassment and false allegations made against him by the Thunder Bay Police Service has been dismissed by a Superior Court judge for being based on speculation and devoid of facts.
The ruling issued by Justice Tracy Nieckarz on Jan. 17, does however, leave the door open for a new statement of claim to be filed against the Thunder Bay Police Services Board.
The plaintiff, who is self-represented, filed the statement of claim in March 2022 against the City of Thunder Bay and the Thunder Bay Police Service and is seeking general, special, aggravated, and punitive damages in the amount of $200,000.
According to the statement of claim, the plaintiff alleges he was falsely accused of stalking someone “many years ago” and he believes the allegations were investigated and proven false.
The plaintiff states he requested the individual he was accused of stalking be charged with making a false accusation, but no charges were filed. He alleges further that he continues to be followed and physically confronted by the individual and her family.
The statement of claim goes on to make several other accusations against the Thunder Bay Police Service, including officers following the plaintiff, police having young women approach him “hoping he will make inappropriate advances,” and his email, internet, and phone conversations being surveyed through “illegal warrants.”
These actions, the plaintiff alleges, have resulted in the termination of his employment and the loss of close relationships with his family and friends and violated his charter rights.
In October 2022, the Thunder Bay Police Service and City of Thunder Bay filed motion to have the statement of claim dismissed, arguing they are not the proper parties to be included in the civil action and because the action is “scandalous, frivolous, or vexatious.”
“Overall, the Defendants argue that the Statement of Claim is so devoid of material facts and violates so many rules of pleadings that it is impossible for the Defendants to properly defend the claims,” Nieckarz noted in her ruling.
Nieckarz agreed that the City of Thunder Bay and the Thunder Bay Police Service are not suable entities in this action and the claim was dismissed. However, leave was granted to name the Thunder Bay Police Services Board as the proper defendant.
“Only the Board is liable for torts committed by members of the Thunder Bay Police Service,” Nieckarz said. "Neither of the two current defendants have vicarious liability for any tort committed by members of the police service.”
But Nieckarz also made note that the statement of claim filed by the plaintiff violates rules of pleading.
She highlighted several issues with the statement of claim, including a lack of material facts such as dates of the allegations, the use of speculation and innuendo, and statements added that are irrelevant, argumentative, inflammatory, and inserted only for colour.
“The pleading is replete with assumptions, suspicions, speculation, and the Plaintiff’s own conclusions regarding the conduct of the police,” Nieckarz said.
“The pleading contains bald allegations, with no material facts to substantiate any of the claims. As drafted, it discloses no reasonable cause of action against anyone. There are too many problems with this pleading for it to be saved by merely striking offending portions.”
While the statement of claim was dismissed, Justice Nieckarz did grant leave for a fresh statement of claim to be filed against the Thunder Bay Police Services Board by the Plaintiff within 30 days of her ruling.
The Thunder Bay Police Services Board will then have 30 days after being served the fresh statement of claim to either file a statement of defense or bring forward a motion to have the statement of claim struck, in whole or in part.
