In its long-anticipated decision in Miazga v. Kvello Estate, the Supreme Court has unanimously held that Crown prosecutor Matthew Miazga is not liable to numerous accused persons he prosecuted on child abuse related charges. In doing so, the Court thoroughly reviewed and refined the tort of malicious prosecution and has made it clear that Crown counsel can only be successfully sued in exceptional cases where the trial judge finds that the prosecution was initiated or furthered for a specifically identified improper purpose. This clarification represents a significant victory for Crown counsel in Canada.
Paul Cavalluzzo and Stephen Moreau acted for the intervener, the Canadian Association of Crown Counsel, both in the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Canada. The CACC's arguments were the foundation for much of the dissenting judge's decision in the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. Those concepts were reintroduced at the Supreme Court, notably the concept that all pre-existing case law around the tort needed to be interpreted because of the different historical foundations of the tort as applied to non-Crown counsel and the concepts that should apply to Crown counsel prosecutions. The Court adopted these concepts in its ruling.
A copy of the Court's ruling is available from their website here