|
Police - Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019 (CSPA). Carrique v. Leach
In Carrique v. Leach (Ont Div Ct, 2025) the Ontario Divisional Court allowed a JR, this brought by the Commissioner of the Ontario Provincial Police against an IPRD decision against "the direction of the Complaints Director of the Law Enforcement Complaints Agency (“LECA”) ... to impose a penalty or agree to a penalty in respect of a finding, made pursuant to section 71 of the Police Services Act, R.S.O 1990, c.P.15 (“the PSA”), ... [officers] ... had committed discreditable conduct in violation of section 2(1)(a)(xi) of the Code of Conduct, .... in its investigation of a police officer’s complaint that she had been sexually assaulted by another police officer".
Here the court notes the new legislative regime (the CSPA) regarding police complaints:[2] Complaints regarding the conduct of police officers are now governed by the Community Safety and Policing Act, 2019, S.O. 2019, c. 1, Sched. 1 (“CSPA”) for matters arising after April 1, 2024. Upon the proclamation of the CSPA on April 1, 2024, the Independent Police Review Director (“IPRD”) is now referred to as the Complaints Director and the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (“OIPRD”) is the Law Enforcement Complaints Agency: See CSPA, s. 130. Because the events giving rise to this application arose before April 1, 2024, there is no dispute that the regulatory scheme under the PSA applies. . Franklin v. Law Enforcement Complaints Agency
In Franklin v. Law Enforcement Complaints Agency (Ont Div Ct, 2025) the Ontario Divisional Court considers a CSPA (police complaint) 'frivolous' issue [CSPA s.158(1)(d)(i)]:[9] LECA determined that Ms. Franklin’s complaint was frivolous within the meaning of s. 158(1)(d)(i) of the Community Safety and Policing Act, S.O. 2019 c. 1 Sch. 1 on the grounds there was an insufficient basis for her complaint (it was speculative and lacking in substance or an air of reality), there was no jurisdiction to review RCMP matters, and that her complaint was essentially the same as the one dismissed on March 27, 2024.
....
[13] Responding more specifically to one of Ms. Franklin’s submissions, it is irrelevant that Justice Shore, acting as a case management justice, set up a schedule for the hearing of the judicial review application. Justice Shore made no findings or determination regarding the merits of Ms. Franklin’s judicial review. Nor in setting up a hearing, does that mean resort to r. 2.1 is precluded. . Liu v. London Police Service
In Liu v. London Police Service (Div Court, 2024) the Divisional Court dismissed a JR of "the decision of the Chief of Police of the London Police Service (LPS), and the unreported decision of the Director of the Law Enforcement Complaints Agency (LECA), formerly known as the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD), confirming the Chief’s decision.":Request for OIPRD review
[15] On March 9, 2024, the applicant requested that the Director of the OIPRD conduct a review of the Chief’s decision, pursuant to s. 71 of the Police Services Act.
OIPRD becomes LECA
[16] On April 1, 2024, the Police Services Act was repealed and replaced with the Community Safety and Policing Act, S.O. 2019, c.1, Sched. 1. The Community Safety and Policing Act created the Law Enforcement Complaints Agency (LECA) which replaced the former OIPRD. LECA is an arms-length agency of the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General that is tasked with investigation of public complaints about the conduct of police officers in Ontario.
Complaints Director’s decision
[17] On April 17, 2024, the Complaints Director with LECA wrote to the applicant setting out his decision confirming the decision of the Chief of Police that the allegations of misconduct were unsubstantiated. In his decision, the Complaints Director advised that, given the request for review had been made prior to April 1, the Director had conducted the review pursuant to s. 71 of the Police Services Act.
....
Standard of Review
[22] The decision of the OIPRD (LECA) is reviewable on a standard of reasonableness: Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65 (CanLII), 2019 S.C.C. 65, [2019] 4 S.C.R. 653.
|
