WU v CANADA (ATTORNEY GENERAL), 2019 ABQB 796
3.68: Court options to deal with significant deficiencies
Wu was an inmate of a minimum-security federal penitentiary in Manitoba. Fellow inmates complained that Wu was seeking them out for predatory relationships. Following an investigation, the warden in Manitoba moved Wu involuntarily from the minimum-security penitentiary in Manitoba to the medium-security federal penitentiary in Bowden, Alberta. Wu filed a habeus corpus Application disputing the deprivation of his residual liberty.
The Court reviewed Wu’s habeus corpus Application under Civil Practice Note 7 and Rule 3.68 in order to determine whether to dismiss Wu’s Application. The Court found that Wu had not meet the test for habeus corpus in his Application, namely that he did not assert a basis for why the transfer was unreasonable and procedurally unfair, and further that Wu had improperly claimed damages. Following the procedure set out in Civil Practice Note 7, the Court identified apparent issues with the Application and gave Wu 14 days to provide a written response to the issues raised by the Court. The Court held that if Wu failed to provide a written response, then a decision would be issued to strike the Application pursuant to Rule 3.68.View CanLII Details