Case information

Constitutional law — Parliamentary privilege — Scope of privilege — Courts — Jurisdiction — Applicant Senator seeking damages from Senate of Canada for alleged unlawful and procedurally unfair suspension from legislative body — Senate of Canada successfully moving to dismiss Senator’s claim against it for want of jurisdiction — Motion to dismiss claim against Senate upheld on appeal — Does Senate immunity oust the jurisdiction of the courts over malicious misconduct? — Does the Senate have the power to deprive a senator of his or her entire statutory salary? — Does the Senate have exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether the Senate itself breached a senator’s Charter rights, even if it refuses to exercise that jurisdiction? — Constitution Act, 1867, ss. 18 and 31 — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 7, 11d) and 12 — Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 21.01(3)(a).

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Senator Michael Duffy is suing the Senate of Canada over his suspension from the red chamber, which he alleges was politically motivated, unconstitutional, procedurally unfair and contrary to his Charter rights. In 2013, the Senate voted to suspend Senator Duffy based on a report from its standing committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration (“CIBA”). The CIBA report concluded that Senator Duffy had violated rules on living and travel expenses. Senator Duffy was later criminally charged in connection with these expenses, but eventually acquitted of all charges. Following the acquittal, the Senate of Canada clawed back a portion of Senator Duffy’s salary, continuing to cite to improperly claimed expenses. Relying in large part on the findings made in his criminal matter, which essentially determined that he committed no prohibited act in making the claims, Senator Duffy launched a civil suit against the Senate. The Senate argues that the lawsuit cannot proceed because its impugned conduct falls squarely within the scope of parliamentary privilege. It accordingly moved to dismiss Senator Duffy’s claims against it. The Superior Court granted the Senate’s motion for want of jurisdiction. It held that the Senate’s alleged conduct falls within the scope of the Senate’s established parliamentary privileges. The Court of Appeal agreed with the Superior Court, and dismissed Senator Duffy’s appeal. It held that the courts lack jurisdiction to adjudicate these allegations, which may only be decided upon by the Senate itself.