Friday, April 14, 2017

Another police probe shut down by the courts

In February the Vancouver sun reported that "A Surrey woman is suing the Abbotsford Police Department, City of Abbotsford and three constables, claiming a police officer drew her gun on her, forced her to the ground, hit her and called her “bitch” and “fat” after stopping the plaintiff for allegedly speeding 18 kilometres over in a 50 km/h zone." That article was actually by Tom Zytaruk from the Surrey Now-Leader.

Now Tom Zytaruk from the Surrey Now-Leader is reporting that the complaint stopped before it started in Vancouver Supreme court because of a WCB decision. The article states the WCB decision by Herb Morton found that because the woman and the cop were both on the clock, the woman does not have a legal right to sue civilly but may apply for WCB benefits. AYFKM? This is why the judicial system is so screwed up. The woman can't sue civilly because the incident happened while she was at work. That is absolute nonsense.


  1. Part of the reason the WCB exists is to pay workers who are injured on the job. When they established WCB the deal to sweeten the pot for the employers was they would not be sued by the workers. Workers when they file for WCB have to give up all rights to sue their employer. Its worked for a very long time and the majority of people do not sue their employers. You never know what can happen, while the WCB pays out year after year.

    So the woman did have a choice, she could have forgone the WCB to sue. However as I've said, suing is never a sure fire thing.

    It may not be a perfect system, but for tens of thousands of workers, if not millions, the WCB system works.

    In this particular case the woman could have accepted the WCB settlement and then continued to put pressure on the local police force to ensure they dealt with the police officer via the disciplinary system. accepting WCB doesn't mean you have to keep your mouth shut.

    1. I cannot see a correlation. If someone receives WCB benefits, I see no act of law that forbids them from suing civilly as well. One cold argue that if their civl case was successful they might have to pay back the WCB benefits they received but one should not prevent the other from proceeding. It's like someone not being allowed to sue for wrongful dismissal because they collect EI benefits after their wrongful termination.

  2. That is the law in B.C. To get employers to sign on to WCB back in the day that was the deal which was made, so you want to gamble with your financial future. The majority of working people don't. So that is the game rules in B.C.

    1. That makes no sense at all. If the employer signed the deal that might prohibit the employer from suing but not the employee.


Sorry. Comments have been closed. In the words of Martin Luther King, "I've seen too much hate to want to hate myself and every time I see it I say to myself that hate is too great a burden to bear. "

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.