An RCMP officer and a retired Vancouver cop say not even police are safe from high-tech spyware
Pair allege RCMP used phone-hacking technology on them as witnesses in ongoing foreign interference case
Retired Vancouver police officer Paul McNamara was out with his family in August 2023 when he had a phone conversation with a friend, Ontario RCMP officer Pete Merrifield.
As he talked, he noticed his phone became unusually hot, "like it was about to melt down."
At the time, McNamara, who retired from the Vancouver Police Department in 2016, was on vacation in Montreal. When he tried to order an Uber, he says his phone was locked due to "too many password attempts."
He found it odd, but brushed it off as a glitch.
Then, that fall, he learned that the national police force had used controversial spyware called an On-Device Investigative Tool (ODIT) to remotely hack into his and Merrifield's phones. This was revealed thanks to evidence in an ongoing court case involving another former RCMP officer where McNamara and Merrifield were witnesses.
McNamara says ODITs allow police to read messages on a person's phone in real time, even on encrypted apps like Signal, but two-step authentication can still otherwise block access to data on certain apps that would require police to know the person's password.
While concerns from privacy advocates and human rights groups have focused on these tools being used to spy on journalists and other citizens, in this case spyware was used on a current and former police officer who say they were only ever told they were witnesses, not suspects, in a foreign interference case.
The two are now raising alarms about how the invasive technology was used in their case and the implications it has for broader police use. Meanwhile, one expert told CBC he worries this type of spyware has surpassed legal frameworks protecting Canadians' privacy rights.
RCMP deputy commissioner discusses force’s controversial usage of spyware technologyCanada has no legislation regulating spyware
In 2022, a House of Commons privacy committee ordered the RCMP to disclose its "device investigation tools." In response, the RCMP revealed it had been using ODITs to hack phones and other devices since 2017 without notifying the public or the federal privacy commissioner.
Canada currently has no legislation regulating spyware use.
A 2024 RCMP report says the force only deploys ODITs "for serious criminal investigations, such as organized crime, national security and terrorism, cybercrime, or other serious crimes," and that the technique is only used with judicial authorization, and "when other investigative means of collecting evidence have proven to be ineffective."
According to the report, some of the tool's technical capabilities include "intercepting communications, collecting and storing data, capturing computer screenshots and keyboard logging, and/or activating microphone and camera features."
Canada's Public Safety ministry has refused to disclose which vendors supply the RCMP with ODITs and has not denied that other government agencies might also use them.
Just last month, a Citizen Lab report detailed "a growing ecosystem of spyware capability" among the RCMP and multiple Ontario-based police services.
"If it's not kept in check, it could be a disaster — which we believe it is," McNamara said in a phone interview with CBC News.
OPP may have secretly used controversial tech that can spy on citizensToronto-based criminal defence lawyer Adam Boni says ODITs make traditional wire tapping "look like something from the stone age," and that the RCMP's use of them has been "shrouded in secrecy."
He says he has concerns about the lack of independent monitoring and review processes around spyware technology.
"There's a whole cluster of issues that demand transparency and accountability, and we're just not seeing that," he said.
"Whenever you have that type of really powerful state surveillance being utilized, and at the same time, steps being taken to prevent full disclosure of what's being done, it raises serious concerns in terms of privacy rights."
Officers surveilled in foreign interference investigation
McNamara and Merrifield filed a lawsuit together last year against the federal government, seeking $5.5 million in damages and alleging defamation, claiming they lost their security clearances — and in McNamara's case, his job — because of "inaccurate, incomplete, misleading and/or false" information provided by CSIS to their employers.
They say CSIS wrongly implicated them in assisting William Majcher, a former RCMP inspector who was charged in 2023 with helping China conduct foreign interference in a case that is still ongoing.
Though both McNamara and Merrifield say they had known Majcher for years, they both deny having any unlawful associations with him.
Both men say they were interviewed by Montreal RCMP regarding their relationships with Majcher, and both say they were informed they were being interviewed as witnesses. Neither were charged with any crime.
Though Merrifield has since had his security clearance restored, both he and McNamara say they suffered stress, anxiety and depression, as well as embarrassment and loss of reputation. Their lawsuit is still ongoing.
It was through evidence that turned up in court files related to the Majcher case, that they learned the RCMP gained access to their cellphones using an ODIT. They believe RCMP investigators hacked their phones because they were unable to get an ODIT on Majcher's phone, as he was based in Hong Kong.
CBC News also obtained an April 2023 affidavit filed by the RCMP to deploy the ODITs to the officers' phones in the Majcher case that appears to indicate they applied them to the wrong numbers at least twice.
"We don't know if they were defunct numbers, dormant numbers, or if they actually snatched data of an innocent private citizen," Merrifield said in a phone interview with CBC News.
An internal RCMP document from May 2023, also published in the Majcher court case, states the ODITs on McNamara and Merrifield were required "for the purpose of collecting historical messages as well as documentary evidence in support of the offences being investigated" in relation to Majcher.
The RCMP appear to have run into multiple issues accessing the phones. A Sept. 7, 2023, email published in court documents related to the Majcher case details failed attempts to crack passwords for several apps or accounts.
"[H]itting the same account over and over again with a wrong password could lead to the account being locked and raise suspicion by the owner," the email read.
Though McNamara says he can't know for sure that the attempts to crack these passwords were related to him, as there were other numbers subject to the ODITs, he told CBC News in an email that it seemed "more than coincidence" that he was also having issues with his phone at around the same time.
Merrifield, McNamara feel 'betrayed' and 'violated'
Merrifield, who has worked with U.S. federal agencies and overseen security for visits by world leaders, foreign dignitaries and royalty through his work with the RCMP, says he feels "betrayed" by the police force "in a way I could not fathom in my worst f--king nightmare."
He has a history of disputes with RCMP brass and is the co-founder and vice-president of its union, the National Police Federation. He also learned from the April 2023 affidavit that the RCMP had ordered an ODIT on his union phone during the time he was engaged in collective bargaining conversations that year. He says this breached not only his privacy, but the privacy of some 19,000 union members.
In the lawsuit, Merrifield also accuses CSIS of previously using ODITs against him in the Majcher case. A CSIS spokesperson told CBC News in an email that the agency is "unable to comment on the matter as it is currently before the courts."
"It's terrifying. I don't care who you are. It's the most powerful tool available to law enforcement or intelligence," Merrifield said.
"There's no hiding from it. They can turn your phone into a camera. They can turn it into a microphone. You can turn the power off, they can still use the device. It's the most intrusive thing that exists in the world today."
CBC News reached out to the RCMP for comment on McNamara and Merrifield's allegations, but the force declined to be interviewed. It instead sent an emailed statement saying, "It would be inappropriate for the RCMP to comment on this case as the matter is before the courts."
McNamara, who once worked undercover in high-profile covert operations with the Vancouver Police Department, says learning the ODITs were ordered on his devices has left him feeling "violated."
Allowing ODITs to become a mainstream investigative tool erodes citizens' right to privacy, he says, and is a serious breach in ethics, moral obligations and legal procedures.
"Having been in the police, we get this mission creep, where the police will push the boundaries," McNamara said. "And so we start to normalize the behaviour, when they shouldn't be doing this."
Technology has surpassed legal framework: lawyer
A spokesperson for the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada said in an email that the RCMP's use of ODITs primarily falls under part six of the criminal code, which sets out provisions for police to get judicial authorization for intercepting private communications in criminal investigations.
The email also noted that the RCMP is subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, including the section eight protection against unreasonable search and seizure, which acts as an additional check on the use of ODITs.
The spokesperson would not speak to this specific case, but said the office conducts "voluntary consultations" with government institutions that are typically focused on program design and implementation, and those consultations "are conducted in confidence."
Boni says police use of ODITs in general signals that Canada has entered an era where technology has vastly surpassed the legal frameworks in place for protection of privacy.
He says lawyers, legislators and judges need to take a hard look at whether or not sufficient checks and balances are in place to prevent abuses before they occur.
"The technology is so expansive, it is so capable, that the temptation to abuse it is compelling," Boni said. "We need to have a really serious conversation in this country about the state's use of this technology."
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
RCMP members who called for resignation of nine cabinet ministers explain motivations
Two RCMP members who openly called for the resignation of nine cabinet ministers in a letter say they are motivated by patriotism, not politics.
Sgt. Peter Merrifield and retired Detective Paul McNamara blew the whistle on what they describe as a catastrophic breakdown in Canada's national security infrastructure and shared their reflections on the YouTube podcast Northern Perspective.
With combined decades of service in the RCMP and Vancouver Police Department, Merrifield and McNamara have witnessed firsthand the systemic failures that compromise Canadian security and individual rights. Their recent open letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney calls for immediate action against nine government ministers they believe have failed in their fundamental duties.
"We've been trying to get official government agency and government elected official attention to a very serious matter for nearly three years," Merrifield explained. His motivation stems from multiple perspectives: as a union executive, a serving RCMP sergeant, and most importantly, as a concerned citizen committed to governmental accountability.
Their complaint centres on what they perceive as rampant misuse of surveillance technologies and a disturbing pattern of intelligence mismanagement. McNamara highlighted the personal cost of these systemic failures, stating, "Not one agency in this country has told me the truth, not one minister has wanted to engage in seeking out that truth."
Their experiences reveal a troubling landscape of covert surveillance. Merrifield described how intelligence agencies like CSIS can deploy military-grade spyware that allows them to "click a button and listen in at virtually any time through your cell phone."
McNamara discovered such spyware on his device, experiencing bizarre symptoms like an overheating phone and unexplained password lockouts. The surveillance wasn't just invasive — it was potentially compromising national security.
Merrifield noted that during his high-security roles, he was escorting dignitaries like US Ambassador Kelly Kraft and hosting President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, all while potentially being monitored by intelligence agencies. Their investigation uncovered what they believe is a fundamental fragility in Canada's national security system.
"If we do not improve it," Merrifield warned, "foreign influencers like Russia and China can simply plant disinformation within the Canadian national security infrastructure, and they will run around chasing their tails."
The case of Bill Meeker, a former intelligence operative, became a focal point of their concerns. Merrifield described how CSIS seemingly manufactured allegations against Meeker and subsequently targeted Merrifield himself, conducting more investigative techniques on him than on Meeker, who was allegedly involved in actual espionage.
McNamara's own experience mirrors this pattern of institutional dysfunction. After a legitimate business trip to China to research swimming pool equipment, he found himself accused of nefarious activities, losing a five-year contract with the US State Department based on uncorroborated intelligence.
"The playing field is not level," McNamara emphasized. "If we have bad intelligence and we don't correct those mistakes, we have major issues."
Their letter targets nine ministers, not to attack them personally, but to highlight systemic failures. As Merrifield articulated, "It's not personal, it's professional. You did not do your job, and you put your hand up and took an oath to serve."
The root of the problem, they argue, is a political culture more focused on optics than governance. "The four-year electoral cycle has become a four-year politicking cycle," Merrifield said. "It's become Instagram moments, photo opportunities, three [or] two-second camera sound bites. It's lost its substance."
Their call to action is clear: Canadians must demand accountability.
"Elected politics is not a right," Merrifield stressed. "It's a choice. If you're just not up to the job, if you don't have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to execute the performance and duties, then don't be there."
Merrifield urged voters to look beyond partisan lines and evaluate actual performance and capability. "We need to park our partisan political views and really start to analyze what these people are telling us they can and will do," Merrifield advised. "What's the track record?"
McNamara echoed this sentiment: "Mistakes are made. Nobody's perfect. But when you make a mistake at this magnitude and you've been advised by two professionals who've been in the world of being accountable and transparent, I expect the same from our government and from the ministers in charge."
RCMP Officers Demand Liberal Cabinet To Resign
The letter, addressed directly to Prime Minister Mark Carney, challenges his leadership and calls on him to “demonstrate that you are not the same old government of the past nine years that has failed to protect Canada.
The document outlines explosive allegations against high-ranking members of the Carney administration, including Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland, Justice Minister Arif Virani, and Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly. The officers accuse these officials of failing to act on critical national security information involving Chinese foreign interference and the mishandling of protected intelligence related to the “Meng Wanzhou–Two Michaels” crisis.
“Several innocent Canadians have been placed at risk of direct retaliation by Chinese foreign intelligence and security agencies,” the letter states. “Had any of your Ministers acted in the two years prior to October of 2024 when their intervention was requested… they would have stopped innocent Canadians from being identified for their activities and knowledge of Canadian covert intelligence operations in China.”
Merrifield and McNamara argue that the handling of the controversy involving Liberal MP Paul Chiang—a former police officer accused of advocating for the abduction of a political opponent to a foreign state—already shows a “lack of political and government experience.”
“You hesitated and did not publicly demonstrate the recognition of the seriousness of the offence,” the letter says.
Nine Ministers Named
The letter details a list of alleged failures, ranging from the misuse of electronic spyware on labor union officials to the unauthorized public release of sensitive Section 38 national security documents. The officers claim these actions—or inactions—violate both ministerial directives and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Among the most serious allegations is that CSIS mishandled covert operations in China and provided false information to the US State Department. This, they say, led to the wrongful termination of a Canadian former police officer working for the US embassy.
The ministers named in the letter include:
- Marco Mendicino (Public Safety)
- Dominic LeBlanc (Public Safety)
- Bill Blair (Public Safety)
- David McGuinty (NSICOP, Public Safety)
- Anita Anand (Treasury Board)
- Steven MacKinnon (Labour)
- Mélanie Joly (Foreign Affairs)
- Arif Virani (Justice)
- Chrystia Freeland (Deputy Prime Minister)
RCMP, CSIS, and a War of Intelligence Failures
The officers allege that Canada’s national intelligence agencies are not only dysfunctional but engaged in dangerous political and legal overreach. “This questionable Chinese interference file was manufactured by CSIS,” the document states, “who mishandled critical national security intelligence during the Meng Wanzhou–Two Michaels crisis.”
One of the most damning accusations is that sensitive and unredacted intelligence was released to the public by the RCMP’s Quebec National Security Unit and the Public Prosecution Service of Canada, in direct violation of Section 38 of the Canada Evidence Act.
The letter challenges Carney to take immediate action: “If indeed you are presenting Canadians a choice of ‘something new,’ then take action now rather than making election campaign promises to ‘look into it’ later.”
Both Merrifield and McNamara offered to provide documents and communications as evidence to support their claims. So far, there has been no official response from the Prime Minister’s Office.
Information for this story was found via the sources and companies mentioned. The author has no securities or affiliations related to the organizations discussed. Not a recommendation to buy or sell. Always do additional research and consult a professional before purchasing a security. The author holds no licenses.
Canada's spy agency accused of negligence and defamation in $5.5M lawsuit
Published:
Peter Merrifield, left, and Paul McNamara. (CTV News)
An RCMP sergeant and a former Vancouver detective have filed a lawsuit that accuses Canada's spy agency of wrongly linking them to an ex-Mountie who is charged with being an agent for China.
Paul McNamara and Peter Merrifield claim that "inaccurate, incomplete, misleading and/or false" information from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) cost them the security clearances they need for their jobs.
"To say I'm a national security threat – that makes me angry," McNamara said in an exclusive interview with CTV National News. "I'll challenge you here. And I will go to my grave to prove I'm not a national security threat."
McNamara is a former Vancouver Police Department detective. After retiring he was hired as the program director at an American security firm called VXL Enterprises, and put in charge of uniformed security at the U.S. Embassy and its consulates across Canada. He lost his security clearance and job in 2021, and has not been able to find work since.
Before becoming the vice-president of the RCMP union, Merrifield was a supervisor in the RCMP's protective policing unit. His responsibilities included providing security for the prime minister, the Royal Family and other heads of state.
When he was in that position, Merrifield says he was one of a few Canadians who had "higher than top secret clearance." Merrifield's clearance was suspended for nearly a year between 2022 and 2023.
"The difference between intelligence and evidence boils down to the burden of proof," Merrifield said. "There is no accountability of intelligence."
Filed in Federal Court, their statement of claim includes accusations of defamation and conducting a negligent investigation.
"Unfortunately for McNamara and Merrifield, CSIS pursued a politically motivated agenda designed to show that it was taking a hard line on foreign interference from China, and cast a wide net, pulling in multiple people with some form of connection to individuals with business in that country," the pair claims in court documents.
"Rather than examining and verifying actual information, CSIS simply made incomplete, inaccurate, misleading and false assertions about the Plaintiffs, and provided them to the Plaintiffs' employers, knowing full well the harm that would follow."
The two are seeking more than $5.5 million in damages for loss of income, mental anguish and damaged reputations after CSIS allegedly flagged them during routine security clearance reviews.
"If we don't have a robust, well-run intelligence service, we are doing more harms to Canadians than the foreign state actors are," McNamara said. "China's done nothing to me … but my own internal national security service, it has."
CSIS declined to comment on the lawsuit.
"It would be inappropriate for CSIS to comment on matters currently before the courts," a CSIS spokesperson said in an email to CTV National News.
The lawsuit comes after two weeks of hearings at the public inquiry into foreign interference. In testimony, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, his cabinet and his staff repeated a common refrain that "intelligence wasn't evidence," as they pushed back on CSIS intelligence about Beijing's meddling in the past two elections.
Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Trudeau said, in response to a question about his confidence in Canada's intelligence apparatus, that he has "of course tremendous confidence in the extraordinary women and men who serve in our national security institutions."
"It is extremely important work that's getting more and more difficult every day. But no government and no leader should simply be a passive receiver of information and intelligence," he said.
"We have a role to play in asking questions, on thinking critically, around encouraging further work on questioning sources and pulling out contradictions. That actually is part and parcel of the work that we all need to do to make sure that everything is done to keep Canadians safe."
McNamara and Merrifield say their problems stem from knowing and speaking with William Majcher, a former Mountie now facing foreign interference charges. Merrifield says he was subjected to a six-hour interview with CSIS agents with "more than three hours" spent on questions about Majcher.
McNamara and Merrifield claim they had nothing to do with Majcher's work in China.
Majcher was as an undercover officer and investigated money laundering for the RCMP before retiring in 2007. Moving to Hong Kong, he co-founded a corporate asset recovery company that reportedly dealt with Chinese investment banks and law firms to recover stolen assets that were being laundered overseas.
Security experts say this could have involved official anti-corruption programs like Operation Fox Hunt, which the Chinese government has used to "involuntarily" return suspects and fugitives. Rights group Safeguard Defenders claims such programs also target dissidents.
Majcher was charged in July with two counts under the Security of Information Act, which covers crimes pertaining to national security and espionage.
"Majcher allegedly used his knowledge and his extensive network of contacts in Canada to obtain intelligence or services to benefit the People's Republic of China," the RCMP said in a July press release. "It is alleged that he contributed to the Chinese government's efforts to identify and intimidate an individual outside the scope of Canadian law."
In an exclusive interview with CTV News while on bail awaiting trial, Majcher denied the allegations.
"I'm a patriot, not a traitor," Majcher said in March. "I'll stand in a courtroom. I'll take a polygraph and I'll challenge any of these people making the accusations to take a polygraph."
Majcher believes he came under suspicion when he was hired by a Chinese think tank to gather information about the Canadian extradition process in the case of Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou, who was detained in Vancouver in December 2018 on a U.S. extradition request.
Majcher describes himself as a capitalist, not a criminal.
"The fact is, unless you're a government lawyer or a government accountant or working for a corporation, everybody else is freelancing out there," Majcher previously told CTV News. "Everybody's working and hustling for business."
Type : Federal Court
Nature of Cause : Tort (v. Crown)
Office : Vancouver Language : English
Type of Action : Ordinary
Filing Date : 2024-04-03
Party Information:
| Party Name | Solicitor | Lawyer(s) / file no |
|---|---|---|
| His Majesty the King in Right of Canada | - | - |
| MERRIFIELD, PETER | - | - |
| McNAMARA, PAUL | Waddell Phillips PC | KINGMAN PHILLIPS, JOHN |
Related Cases:
No data found for this section.
Recorded Entry Information : T-790-24
Type : Federal Court
Nature of Proceeding : Tort (v. Crown)
Office : Vancouver Language : English
Type of Action : Federal Court
Filing Date : 2024-04-03
Information about the court file
In
the columns below, you can see a list of all the documents that are
part of the file. Some documents may be confidential or classified.
NEW: Each document has an identification (ID) number.
To obtain copies of public documents, contact the Registry by email at fc-copies-cf@cas-satj.gc.ca. To obtain documents in person or by fax, contact the Registry office closest to you.
In your email, you must provide the following information:
- Subject line: Court File Number
- Body of the email: ID number (ID column) and Name of document (Recorded Entry Summary column)
| ID | Date Filed | Office | Recorded Entry Summary | Download |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | YYYY-MM-DD | City | Name of document |
*You can download any document with an icon in the last column (Download), thanks to the Federal Court’s Online Access to Court Records Pilot Project.
Obtaining documents from the Registry, in person, by fax or through online access, does not grant you a copyright licence or permission. You must use the materials in accordance with the Copyright Act, RSC 1985, c C-42.
| ID | Date Filed | Office | Recorded Entry Summary | Download |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 64 | 2025-10-09 | Vancouver | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 09-OCT-2025 directing that "This direction is further to the CMC held on October 9, 2025, and confirms the dates and steps set out below in connection with the Plaintiff's Motion that was discussed during the CMC. 1. By October 23, 2025, the Plaintiffs shall serve and file their moving parties' motion reocrd. 2. Prior to November 7, 2025, the parties shall confer on a proposed schedule for the various steps leading up to the hearing of this motion. 3. By November 7, 2025, the parties shall submit a joint letter to the Court providing : a proposed schedule for the various steps leading up to the hearing of this motion and mutual availability for a CMC should the Court wish to schedule one. If the parties are unable to agree on any or the above, after having discussed any points of disagreement by video, phone or in person, the letter shall also set out any points of disagreement and respective positions of the parties." placed on file on 09-OCT-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 63 | 2025-10-09 | Vancouver | Vancouver 09-OCT-2025 BEFORE Associate Judge John C. Cotter Language: E Before the Court: Case Management Conference Result of Hearing: Matter heard held by way of video conference Duration per day: 09-OCT-2025 from 12:30 to 12:54 Courtroom : Vancouver (Zoom) Court Registrar: Ginette Lischenski Total Duration: 24mins Appearances: John Kingman Phillips, KC from Phillips Barristers PC 647-220-7420 representing Plaintiff Otto Phillips from Phillips Barristers PC 647-228-6480 representing Plaintiff Shain Widdifield from DOJ Ontario 437-329-6306 representing Defendant Andrew Eyer from DOJ Ontario 604-753-9706 representing Defendant Deniz Samadi from DOJ Ontario 437-419-9228 representing Defendant Comments: Direction to follow Recorded by Zoom 3 and TASCAM Minutes of Hearing entered in Vol. 1130 page(s) 257 - 257 Abstract of Hearing placed on file | |
| 62 | 2025-09-22 | Vancouver | Confirmation email of the Written Directions of the Court dated 22-SEP-2025 on the parties. placed on file on 22-SEP-2025 | |
| 61 | 2025-09-22 | Vancouver | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 22-SEP-2025 directing that "This Direction is further to the letter form Plaintiffs' counsel dated September 19, 2025. A case management conference will be held by video on October 9, 2025 at 3:30 PM Eastern. placed on file on 22-SEP-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 60 | 2025-09-19 | Vancouver | Letter from Plaintiff dated 19-SEP-2025 further to the Direction of the Court dated 05-SEP-2025 to request a CMC be set and a timetable for next steps on the October 7th or 9th, 2025. received on 19-SEP-2025 | |
| 59 | 2025-09-05 | Vancouver | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 05-SEP-2025 directing that "Further to the request of plaintiffs' counsel, with the consent of the defendant, the case management conference scheduled for this afternoon is adjourned to a date to be determined. Counsel shall confer and submit a letter to the Court with mutual availability for a case management conference." placed on file on 05-SEP-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 58 | 2025-09-05 | Vancouver | Memorandum to file from Vancouver Local Office dated 05-SEP-2025 Plaintiffs' counsel has requested, via email, an adjournment of the CMC scheduled for 5-SEP-2025 due to the unexpected unavailability of counsel. Defendant's counsel consents to the request. Plaintiffs' request has been forwarded to the presiding judge for directions. placed on file. | |
| 57 | 2025-07-28 | Vancouver | Vancouver 28-JUL-2025 BEFORE Associate Judge John C. Cotter Language: E Before the Court: Case Management Conference Result of Hearing: CMC heard. Directions issued. held by way of video conference Duration per day: 28-JUL-2025 from 12:33 to 13:00 Courtroom : Vancouver (Zoom) Court Registrar: Priscilla Lam Total Duration: 27min Appearances: Otto Phillips (Phillips Barristers PC) 647-228-6480 representing Plaintiff Shain Widdifield, Andrew Eyer, Deniz Samadi (DOJ) 437-329-6306 / (604) 753-9706 / (437) 419-9228 representing Defendant Comments: Recorded using Zoom Cloud. Minutes of Hearing entered in Vol. 1129 page(s) 402 - 402 Abstract of Hearing placed on file | |
| 56 | 2025-07-28 | Vancouver | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 28-JUL-2025 directing that "In this Direction: "CMC" refers to a case management conference. This Direction is further to the CMC held on July 28, 2025. A CMC will be held by video on September 5, 2025, at 3:30 PM Eastern. In addition, counsel are asked to hold September 19, 2025, at 3:30 PM in the event that the above-noted September 5, 2025 CMC needs to be rescheduled." placed on file on 28-JUL-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 55 | 2025-07-24 | Vancouver | Communication to the Court from the Registry dated 24-JUL-2025 re: ID 54 | |
| 54 | 2025-07-23 | Vancouver | Letter from Defendant dated 23-JUL-2025 pursuant to the Court's direction dated July 9, 2025 regarding the previous CMC and in advance of the further CMC scheduled on July 28, 2025. Parties provide a joint update and their positions on a timetable. received on 23-JUL-2025 | |
| 53 | 2025-07-09 | Vancouver | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 09-JUL-2025 directing that "This Direction is further to the case management conference held on July 9, 2025. By July 23, 2025, the parties shall have further discussions on a proposed schedule, and shall provide a status update letter to the Court. A further case management conference will be held by video on July 28, 2025 3:30 PM Eastern." placed on file on 09-JUL-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 52 | 2025-07-09 | Vancouver | Vancouver 09-JUL-2025 BEFORE Associate Judge John C. Cotter Language: E Before the Court: Case Management Conference Result of Hearing: matter set for further CMC on 28-JUL-2025 at 3:30 p.m. EST held by way of video conference Duration per day: 09-JUL-2025 from 09:08 to 09:38 Courtroom : Vancouver (Zoom) Court Registrar: Ginette Lischenski Total Duration: 30mins Appearances: John Kingman Phillips KC from Phillips Barristers Professional Corp 647-220-07420 representing Plaintiff Otto Phillips from Phillips Barristers Professional Corp 647-228-6480 representing Plaintiff Shain Widdifield from the Department of Justice 437-329-6306 representing Defendant Andrew Eyer from the Department of Justice 437-329-6306 representing Defendant Deniz Samadi from the Department of Justice 437-329-6306 representing Defendant Comments: Direction of Cotter, AJ to follow Recorded by Zoom 3 and TASCAM Minutes of Hearing entered in Vol. 1129 page(s) 323 - 323 Abstract of Hearing placed on file | |
| 51 | 2025-07-07 | Vancouver | Letter from Defendant dated 07-JUL-2025 joint status update from the parties providing their respective positions received on 07-JUL-2025 | |
| 50 | 2025-05-23 | Toronto | Solicitor's certificate of service on behalf of John Kingman Phillips, K.C. confirming service of Amended Statement of Claim (DOC 17) upon Defendant by Email on 23-MAY-2025 filed on 23-MAY-2025 | |
| 49 | 2025-05-23 | Toronto | Amended Statement of Claim filed on 23-MAY-2025 | |
| 48 | 2025-06-27 | Toronto | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 27-JUN-2025 directing that This Direction is further to the letter from defendant's counsel dated June 23, 2025, which letter was submitted further to the Direction dated June 18, 2025. The amended statement of claim submitted by the plaintiffs to the Registry on May 23, 2025, shall be accepted for filing effective on that date. placed on file on 27-JUN-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 47 | 2025-06-23 | Toronto | Letter from Defendant to Federal Court - CMT Team dated 23-JUN-2025 Writing further to the court's direction on June 18, 2025 to confirm the defendant's has the correct version of the amended Statemebt of Claim. received on 23-JUN-2025 | |
| 46 | 2025-06-18 | Vancouver | Confirmation email sent received from all parties with respect to ID 45 placed on file on 18-JUN-2025 | |
| 45 | 2025-06-18 | Vancouver | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 18-JUN-2025 directing that This Direction is further to a case management conference held on June 18, 2025. By June 25, 2025, the defendant shall submit a letter to the Court with the defendant's position on the amended statement of claim submitted by the plaintiffs to the Registry on May 23, 2025, and specifically, whether this is the version of the amended statement of claim referred to in the letter from defendant's counsel to the Court dated April 17, 2025. A further case management conference will be held by video on July 9, 2025 at noon Eastern / 9:00 AM Pacific. By July 7, 2025, the parties shall submit a joint status update letter to the Court. placed on file on 18-JUN-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 44 | 2025-06-18 | Vancouver | Vancouver 18-JUN-2025 BEFORE Associate Judge John C. Cotter Language: E Before the Court: Case Management Conference Result of Hearing: further CMC to be held on 09-JUL-2025. Update letter to be provided by the parties on 07-JUL-2025 held by way of video conference Duration per day: 18-JUN-2025 from 09:00 to 09:50 Courtroom : Vancouver (Zoom) Court Registrar: Eva Kan Total Duration: 50min Appearances: John Kingman Phillips, KC and Otto Phillips; Phillips Barristers 647-220-7420 and 647-228-6480 representing Plaintiff Shain Widdifield, Andrew Eyer and Deniz Samadi; DoJ 437-329-6306 representing Defendant Comments: Recorded using ZOOM Minutes of Hearing entered in Vol. 1129 page(s) 220 - 220 Abstract of Hearing placed on file | |
| 43 | 2025-06-16 | Vancouver | Communication to the Court from the Registry dated 16-JUN-2025 re: ID 42 | |
| 42 | 2025-06-16 | Vancouver | Letter from Defendant dated 16-JUN-2025 noting positions on timetable to be discussed at CMC scheduled 18-JUN-2025 received on 16-JUN-2025 | |
| 41 | 2025-06-02 | Vancouver | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 02-JUN-2025 directing that "A case management conference will be held by video on June 18, 2025, at noon Eastern. By June 13, 2025, the parties shall confer and submit a joint letter to the Court providing a proposed timetable for next steps. If the parties are unable to agree on any aspects of the timetable and have discussed same by video, telephone or in person, any points of difference shall be identified in the letter, and a brief summary of the respective positions of the parties shall be included." placed on file on 02-JUN-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 40 | 2025-05-16 | Vancouver | Communication to the Court from the Registry dated 16-MAY-2025 re: ID 39 | |
| 39 | 2025-05-16 | Vancouver | Letter from Plaintiff dated 16-MAY-2025 requesting a case conference to set a timetable for next steps. cc: counsel for the Defendant received on 16-MAY-2025 | |
| 38 | 2025-05-09 | Vancouver | Communication to the Court from the Registry dated 09-MAY-2025 re: ID 37 | |
| 37 | 2025-05-08 | Vancouver | Letter from Plaintiff dated 08-MAY-2025 parties have now confered about a timeline and remaining stpes. request CMC with CMJ to set timetable for next steps received on 08-MAY-2025 | |
| 36 | 2025-04-22 | Toronto | Letter from Defendant dated 17-APR-2025 Status update further to the parties' joint letter submitted April 9, 2025. The defendant advised the Plaintiffs that it has no further objections to the draft amended claim provided by the Plaintiffs on April 9. Defendant proposed to deliver its Statement of Defence by July 18, 2025. received on 22-APR-2025 | |
| 35 | 2025-04-10 | Vancouver | Communication to the Court from the Registry dated 10-APR-2025 re: ID 34 | |
| 34 | 2025-04-09 | Vancouver | Letter from Plaintiff dated 09-APR-2025 providing a joint status update and noting that Canada requests, with Plaintiffs' non-opposition, to provide a further status update to the Court by 17-APR-2025 to determine if a further CMC is required. received on 09-APR-2025 | |
| 33 | 2025-03-05 | Toronto | Order dated 05-MAR-2025 rendered by Associate Judge John C. Cotter Matter considered with personal appearance The Court's decision is with regard to Motion Doc. No. 6 Result: granted in part Filed on 05-MAR-2025 copies sent to parties entered in J. & O. Book, volume 1708 page(s) 226 - 246 Interlocutory Decision | |
| 32 | 2025-02-27 | Toronto | Toronto 27-FEB-2025 BEFORE Associate Judge John C. Cotter Language: E Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 6 on behalf of Defendant Result of Hearing: Matter reserved held in Court Senior Usher: John Bohdanowicz Duration per day: 27-FEB-2025 from 09:35 to 12:06 Courtroom : Courtroom No. 4-A - Toronto Court Registrar: Andrew Murray Total Duration: 2h 31min Appearances: Otto Phillips N/A representing Plaintiff Laurie Young N/A representing Plaintiff Shain Widdifield N/A representing Defendant Andrew Eyer N/A representing Defendant Comments: DARS not used, recorded on tascam Minutes of Hearing entered in Vol. 1125 page(s) 475 - 476 Abstract of Hearing placed on file | |
| 31 | 2025-02-06 | Toronto | Written directions of the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 06-FEB-2025 directing This Direction is further to the Direction dated January 21, 2025, and the letter from defendant's counsel dated January 28, 2025 providing joint availability of the parties for the hearing of the defendant's motion to strike portions of the statement of claim. That motion will be heard on February 27, 2025, commencing at 9:30 AM, in person at 180 Queen St. W., Toronto, Ontario. The hearing is scheduled for 3 hours. received on 06-FEB-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 30 | 2025-01-28 | Toronto | Communication to the Court from the Registry dated 28-JAN-2025 re: Letter (ID 29) Placed before Case Management Judge (Associate Judge Cotter) | |
| 29 | 2025-01-28 | Toronto | Letter from Defendant dated 28-JAN-2025 Advising Shain Widdifield has replaced Sean Gaudet as counsel for the defendant and that the parties will be available February 26, 27 or 28 for the hearing of the Motion to Strike received on 28-JAN-2025 | |
| 28 | 2025-01-21 | Toronto | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 21-JAN-2025 directing that This Direction is further to the email from respondent's counsel to the Case Management Team dated January 20, 2025 [Respondent's Email] Pursuant to my Direction dated December 9, 2024, the defendant's motion to strike portions of the statement of claim was rescheduled to be heard on January 22, 2025. For the reasons set out in the Respondent's Email, the hearing of that motion will not proceed on January 22, 2025 and will be rescheudled to a date to be determined. As soon as possible, as by no later than January 28, 2025, the parties shall submit joint letters to the Court setting out dates of mutual availability for the hearing of the motion in February 2025, preferably during the weeks of February 17 and 25, 2025. placed on file on 21-JAN-2025 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 27 | 2025-01-06 | Vancouver | Solicitor's certificate of service on behalf of John Kingman Phillips, K.C confirming service of Doc 14 upon Defendant by e-mail on 06-JAN-2025 filed on 06-JAN-2025 | |
| 26 | 2025-01-06 | Vancouver | Notice of change of solicitor on behalf of Plaintiff filed on 06-JAN-2025 | |
| 25 | 2024-12-09 | Toronto | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 09-DEC-2024 directing that The defendant's motion dated and filed August 30, 2024, seeking to strike portions of the statement of claim, currently scheduled to be heard on January 16, 2025 is rescheduled and will now be heard on January 22, 2025, commencing at 9:30AM, in person at 180 Queen St. W., Toronto, Ontario. The hearing is scheduled for 3 hours." placed on file on 09-DEC-2024 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 24 | 2024-10-04 | Vancouver | Solicitor's certificate of service on behalf of John Kingman Phillips, K.C. confirming service of DOC 12 upon Defendant by email on 04-OCT-2024 filed on 04-OCT-2024 | |
| 23 | 2024-10-04 | Vancouver | Motion Record in response to Motion Doc. No. 6 containing the following original document(s): 10 11 Number of copies received: 1 on behalf of Plaintiff filed on 04-OCT-2024 | |
| 22 | 2024-10-04 | Vancouver | Written Representations contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff concerning Motion Doc. No. 6 filed on 04-OCT-2024 | |
| 21 | 2024-10-04 | Vancouver | Affidavit of Valerie Teichroeb sworn on 04-OCT-2024 contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Plaintiff in opposition to Motion Doc. No. 6 filed on 04-OCT-2024 | |
| 20 | 2024-09-24 | Toronto | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 24-SEP-2024 directing that "The defendant's motion dated and filed August 30, 2024, seeking to strike portions of the statement of claim, will be heard in person at 180 Queen St. W., Toronto, Ontario, on January 16, 2025 commencing at 9:30AM. The hearing is scheduled for 3 hours." placed on file on 24-SEP-2024 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 19 | 2024-09-24 | Toronto | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 24-SEP-2024 directing that "This Direction is further to the letter from the plaintiffs' counsel dated September 24, 2024, stated to be written with the concurrence of counsel for the defendant. The deadline set in paragraph 3 of the Direction dated August 27, 2024, for the plaintiffs to serve and file their respondents' motion record provided for in Rule 365 is extended to October 4, 2024." placed on file on 24-SEP-2024 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 18 | 2024-09-24 | Toronto | Letter from Plaintiff dated 24-SEP-2024 This letter requests to an extension of time for the plaintiff to file their motion received on 24-SEP-2024 | |
| 17 | 2024-09-05 | Toronto | Letter from Defendant dated 05-SEP-2024 This letter is in regards to the logistics of the motion to strike received on 05-SEP-2024 | |
| 16 | 2024-08-30 | Toronto | Solicitor's certificate of service on behalf of Sean Gaudet confirming service of Motion to strike upon Plaintiff by email on 30-AUG-2024 filed on 30-AUG-2024 | |
| 15 | 2024-08-30 | Toronto | Motion Record containing the following original document(s): 6 7 Number of copies received: 1 on behalf of Defendant filed on 30-AUG-2024 | |
| 14 | 2024-08-30 | Toronto | Written Representations contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Defendant concerning Motion Doc. No. 6 filed on 30-AUG-2024 | |
| 13 | 2024-08-30 | Toronto | Notice of Motion contained within a Motion Record on behalf of Defendant in writing to be dealt with in the Toronto local office for an Order striking certain paragraphs of the statement of claim filed on 30-AUG-2024 | |
| 12 | 2024-08-27 | Toronto | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 27-AUG-2024 directing that "This Direction is further to the letter from defendant's counsel dated August 26, 2024, requesting on behalf of the parties that the schedule set in the Direction dated August 8, 2024, be modified. The following timetable shall apply in place of the timetable set out in the Direction dated August 8, 2024, for the steps leading up to the hearing of the defendant's motion to strike portions of the statement of claim: 1)the moving party's motion record provided for in Rule 364 shall be served and filed by August 30, 2024; 2)the parties shall submit a joint letter to the Court by September 6, 2024, setting out: a)the proposed location for the oral hearing of the motion; b)the total estimated time required for the hearing of the motion; and c)dates of availability for the hearing of the motion during the period September 25 to November 15, 2024. 3)the respondent's motion record provided for in Rule 365 shall be served and filed by September 24, 2024." placed on file on 27-AUG-2024 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 11 | 2024-08-26 | Toronto | Letter from Defendant dated 26-AUG-2024 This letter requests an extension of time in regards to the motion to strike received on 26-AUG-2024 | |
| 10 | 2024-08-08 | Toronto | Written directions received from the Court: Associate Judge John C. Cotter dated 08-AUG-2024 directing that "This Direction is further to the letter from defendant's counsel dated August 7, 2024. The following timetable shall apply for the steps leading up to the hearing of the defendant's motion to strike portions of the statement of claim: 1)the moving party's motion record provided for in rule 364 shall be served and filed by August 26, 2024; 2)the parties shall submit a joint letter to the Court by August 30, 2024 setting out: a)the proposed location of the oral hearing of the motion; b)the total estimated time required for the hearing of the motion; and c)dates of availability for the hearing of the motion during the period September 18 to November 15, 2024. 3)the respondent's motion record provided for in Rule 365 shall be served and filed by September 16, 2024." placed on file on 08-AUG-2024 Confirmed in writing to the party(ies) | |
| 9 | 2024-08-07 | Toronto | Letter from Respondent dated 07-AUG-2024 This letter is in regards to a motion to strike received on 07-AUG-2024 | |
| 8 | 2024-07-24 | Ottawa | Order dated 24-JUL-2024 rendered by Chief Justice Crampton Matter considered without personal appearance The Court's decision is with regard to Order dated 27-JUN-2024 Result: "IT IS ORDERED pursuant to Rule 383 that Associate Judge John C. Cotter is assigned as Case Management Judge in this matter." Filed on 24-JUL-2024 copies sent to parties entered in J. & O. Book, volume 1666 page(s) 361 - 361 Interlocutory Decision | |
| 7 | 2024-06-27 | Toronto | Order dated 27-JUN-2024 rendered by Associate Judge John C. Cotter Matter considered without personal appearance The Court's decision is with regard to Letter from Defendant dated 24-JUN-2024 Result: granted This action shall continue as a specially managed proceeding, and is referred to the Office of the Chief Justice for the appointment of a case management judge. Filed on 27-JUN-2024 copies sent to parties entered in J. & O. Book, volume 1662 page(s) 357 - 358 Interlocutory Decision | |
| 6 | 2024-06-26 | Toronto | Communication to the Court from the Registry dated 26-JUN-2024 re: R.369 ID 5 sent to Court for disposition. A.J. Cotter | |
| 5 | 2024-06-24 | Toronto | Letter from Respondent dated 24-JUN-2024 The parties agree that this case will require case management received on 24-JUN-2024 | |
| 4 | 2024-05-14 | Toronto | Solicitor's certificate of service on behalf of ADAM GILANI confirming service of the Notice of Intention to Respond upon Defendant Plaintiff by email on 23-APR-2024 filed on 14-MAY-2024 | |
| 3 | 2024-04-24 | Toronto | Notice of Intention to Respond filed on 24-APR-2024 | |
| 2 | 2024-04-10 | Vancouver | Memorandum to file from Vancouver Local Office dated 10-APR-2024 On this date, the Registry served the Statement of Claim (Doc. 1) on the Respondent by email to the Department of Justice at Vancouver. placed on file. | |
| 1 | 2024-04-03 | Vancouver | Statement of Claim and 2 cc's filed on 03-APR-2024 Certified copy(ies)/copy(ies) transmitted to Director of the Regional Office of the Department of Justice Section 48 - $2.00 |
No comments:
Post a Comment