Institutional Child Abuse in Canada - Civil Cases

As prepared for the Law Commission of Canada by Goldie M. Shea

"If the scourge of sexual predation is to be stamped out, or at least controlled, there must be powerful motivation acting upon those who control institutions engaged in the care, protection and nurturing of children."

Wilkinson, J in G.J. v. Griffiths [1995] B.C.J. No. 2370 (S.C.), online: QL at para. 69.


"In summary, the test for vicarious liability for an employee's sexual abuse of a client should focus on whether the employer's enterprise and empowerment of the employee materially increased the risk of the sexual assault and hence the harm. The test must not be applied mechanically, but with a sensitive view to the policy considerations that justify the imposition of vicarious liability -- fair and efficient compensation for wrong and deterrence. This requires trial judges to investigate the employee's specific duties and determine whether they gave rise to special opportunities for wrongdoing. Because of the peculiar exercises of power and trust that pervade cases such as child abuse, special attention should be paid to the existence of a power or dependency relationship, which on its own often creates a considerable risk of wrongdoing."

McLachlin, J. in Bazley v. Curry (1999), 174 D.L.R. (4th) 45 (S.C.C.) at para. 46.


"...whenever an employer confers, on an employee, parental authority and power over children, and, at the same time, gives that employee unfettered access to the children in a residential facility, the employer will be vicariously liable if the employee sexually assaults those children during the time the employee has parental control over them and access to them as residents of the residential facility."
Maurice, J. in D.W. v. Canada (Attorney General) [1999] Sask.J. No. 742 (Q.B.), online: QL at para 23.


"The question is: whether the employer's enterprise and empowerment of the employee materially increased the risk of the sexual assault and therefore the harm? In each case, the court must investigate the employee's specific duties to determine whether it gave rise to special opportunities for wrongdoing. In this respect, special attention must be paid to the existence of a power or dependency relationship."
Hunter, J in V.P. v. Canada (Attorney General) [1999] Sask.J. No. 740 (Q.B.), online: QL at para 72.

This report consists of a compilation of civil cases and statements of claim relating to institutional child abuse in Canada. The focus is on civil actions concerning institutional and systemic abuse, not domestic (or individual) abuse. The cases have been obtained from a variety of sources using both electronic databases and manual searching methods. The offices of the Minister of Justice in each province and territory have been contacted and, in most situations, have been extremely helpful. Individual lawyers have been contacted. Some counsel represent hundreds of clients suing various defendants regarding events that occurred at one institution. On occasion, lawyers have expressed concern with releasing potentially sensitive and confidential information to the Law Commission and, unfortunately, felt unable to release information regarding current or previously resolved cases in which they are or have previously been involved.

This report contains three sections. The cases are presented alphabetically in chart format and include a synopsis of the cause of action, the allegations made and the eventual outcome (damages, award or order). To the best of our ability, all civil cases involving allegations of institutional child abuse that have been reported in Canada to the date of October 1, 1999 are included in section 1. Samples of the allegations contained in statements of claim filed in relation to institutional child abuse are included in section 2. Section 2 is not a delineation of all of the statements of claim filed but is more a cross-country selection of claims, which may or may not have been settled to date. The section is meant to provide examples of the general structure of the claims and allegations contained within. It should be noted that the allegations contained in a statement of claim have not been proved in court and therefore cannot be taken as fact. These cases are organised alphabetically according to the last name of the first plaintiff listed in the Statement of Claim.

Finally, section 3 contains two tables that have generously been provided by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (DIAND) and is dated October 29, 1999. The first table indicates the number of active civil cases where institutional child abuse claims have been filed involving Aboriginal residential schools and DIAND. Appendix A to the table is a graph that lists the residential schools in litigation.


As much as possible, best efforts have been made to ensure that all of the information provided is up-to-date as of October 1, 1999. Although the report is dated October 1999 additional information has been provided on some pertinent cases to ensure that the information is as current as possible.

Read the Report here...