Skip to main content

Case information

Conduct a refined search of the Supreme Court of Canada database to obtain details on the status of a matter before the Court.


35284

Alain Olivier v. Attorney General of Canada, et al.

(Quebec) (Civil) (By Leave)

Docket

Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.

List of proceedings
Date Proceeding Filed By
(if applicable)
2013-11-07 Close file on Leave
2013-11-07 Certificate of taxation issued to, Me Marie Marmet
2013-11-07 Decision on the bill of costs, in the amount of $1,390.34, DeRg
2013-11-07 Submission of the bill of costs, DeRg
2013-11-06 Reconsideration not accepted for filing, (documents returned)
2013-09-20 Letter acknowledging receipt of a complete motion for reconsideration
2013-09-19 Motion for reconsideration of the application for leave to appeal, (Book Form), (joint with an extension of time), Completed on: 2013-09-19 Alain Olivier
2013-08-26 Bill of costs, (filing fee to follow-received October 7, 2013), Completed on: 2013-10-07 Attorney General of Canada
2013-07-12 Copy of formal judgment sent to Registrar of the Court of Appeal and all parties
2013-07-12 Judgment on leave sent to the parties
2013-07-11 Judgment of the Court on the application for leave to appeal, The respondents’ motion to file a response to the applicant’s reply is granted. The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montréal), Number 500-09-018408-088, 2013 QCCA 70, dated January 21, 2013, is dismissed with costs.
Dismissed, with costs
2013-07-11 Decision on the miscellaneous motion, see judgment on leave application
Granted
2013-06-03 All materials on application for leave submitted to the Judges, LeB F Ka
2013-06-03 Submission of miscellaneous motion, LeB F Ka
2013-05-21 Notice of miscellaneous motion, (Book Form), To serve and file a response to the reply (response to reply included), Completed on: 2013-05-21 Attorney General of Canada
2013-05-08 Correspondence received from, François Audet and Raevin Pearl dated May 6, 2013. Re: Response to the letter of May 2, 2013 Alain Olivier
2013-05-03 Correspondence received from, Marie Marmet dated May 2, 2013. Re: Transcript of the Court of Appeal Attorney General of Canada
2013-04-29 Applicant's reply to respondent's argument, Completed on: 2013-04-29 Alain Olivier
2013-04-19 Respondent's response on the application for leave to appeal, Completed on: 2013-04-19 Attorney General of Canada
2013-03-28 Letter acknowledging receipt of a complete application for leave to appeal
2013-03-22 Application for leave to appeal, Completed on: 2013-03-22 Alain Olivier

Parties

Please note that in the case of closed files, the “Status” column reflects the status of the parties at the time of the proceedings. For more information about the proceedings and about the dates when the file was open, please consult the docket of the case in question.

Main parties

Main parties - Appellants
Name Role Status
Olivier, Alain Applicant Active

v.

Main parties - Respondents
Name Role Status
Attorney General of Canada Respondent Active
Jean-Marie Leblanc (a.k.a. Glen Barry), Barry Bennett, Jack Dop, Jim Girdlestone, The Estate of the Late Ray Peach, Neil Pouliot, Ken Kelly, Frank Palmer and the Estate of the Late Denis Massey Respondent Active

Counsel

Party: Olivier, Alain

Counsel
François Audet
Reevin Pearl
Audet F.G. & Associés
1800 McGill
Bureau 830
Montréal, Quebec
H3A 3J6
Telephone: (514) 840-0001
FAX: (514) 840-1115
Email: faudet@citenet.net
Agent
Marie-France Major
Supreme Advocacy LLP
100- 340 Gilmour Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 0R3
Telephone: (613) 695-8855 Ext: 102
FAX: (613) 695-8580
Email: mfmajor@supremeadvocacy.ca

Party: Attorney General of Canada

Counsel
David Lucas
Marie Marmet
Attorney General of Canada
Guy-Favreau Complex, East Tower, 9th Floor
200 René-Lévesque Blvd. West
Montréal, Quebec
H2Z 1X4
Telephone: (514) 283-8735
FAX: (514) 283-9690
Agent
Christopher M. Rupar
Attorney General of Canada
50 O'Connor Street, Suite 50, Room 557
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 6L2
Telephone: (613) 670-6290
FAX: (613) 954-1920
Email: christopher.rupar@justice.gc.ca

Party: Jean-Marie Leblanc (a.k.a. Glen Barry), Barry Bennett, Jack Dop, Jim Girdlestone, The Estate of the Late Ray Peach, Neil Pouliot, Ken Kelly, Frank Palmer and the Estate of the Late Denis Massey

Counsel
David Lucas
Attorney General of Canada
Guy-Favreau Complex, East Tower, 9th Floor
200 René-Lévesque Blvd. West
Montréal, Quebec
H2Z 1X4
Telephone: (514) 283-8735
FAX: (514) 283-9690
Agent
Christopher M. Rupar
Attorney General of Canada
50 O'Connor Street, Suite 50, Room 557
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 6L2
Telephone: (613) 670-6290
FAX: (613) 954-1920
Email: christopher.rupar@justice.gc.ca

Summary

Keywords

None.

Summary

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.

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Prescription – Can the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (“RCMP”), following incarceration of the Applicant in a third world country, raise prescription as a defense? – Is it possible to psychologically overcome a physical impossibility to act? – Were the provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as provided by sections 6, 7, 9 10(c), 11(d), 11(f), 12 and 24(1) violated insofar as RCMP willfully and intentionally targeted a Canadian citizen with the avowed purpose of having the Canadian citizen arrested, imprisoned, convicted and executed in a foreign country? – Does the protection afforded Canadian citizens by the Charter end at the border? – At the end of its 18-month operation in Canada, can the RCMP sidestep the Canadian Charter by bringing the Canadian citizen to another country to face foreign laws? – Was the Applicant entrapped in Canada as well as in Thailand pursuant to the principles of law concerning entrapment as defined by the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of R. v. Mack [1988] 2 R.C.S. 903? – Does Canada’s drug policy take precedence over the Charter, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. R-10 and related policy directives, the Operations Manual as well as Ministerial Directives? What are the consequences of non-compliance? – Is the RCMP responsible for the actions of its civil agents?

The Applicant, a Canadian citizen, was imprisoned in Thailand in 1989 following a sting operation involving the importation of heroin into Canada from Thailand. The Applicant now claims that he would never have engaged in such criminal activity had he not been lured into it by the RCMP. Prior to the sting operation, the Applicant had been identified as a possible drug importer by an RCMP informant. The Applicant is a former drug addict but he did not, at the time, have a criminal record. Background checks conducted by the RCMP erroneously attributed to him a number of crimes committed by his twin brother, a mistake which was subsequently corrected. The Applicant was eventually met by undercover officers portraying themselves as drug dealers in search of a source. The Applicant stated that he had a heroin source in Thailand to whom he could introduce the undercover officers. The Thai authorities were informed of same and agreed to cooperate. Throughout this time, the Applicant claims to have been subjected to a reign of terror, including insinuations on the part of the RCMP informant that the persons involved were capable of committing murder. The Applicant finally went to Thailand and set up the introduction to the Thai heroin source. He and the Thai involved were arrested by Thai police, prosecuted and convicted under Thai law. After eight and a half years of imprisonment in Thailand, the Applicant was transferred to a prison in Quebec in 1997 and was later paroled. In 2000, the Applicant instituted legal proceedings based on allegations that he was the victim of entrapment by the RCMP, and seeks damages in the amount of over 47 million dollars.

Lower court rulings

January 8, 2008
Superior Court of Quebec

2008 QCCS 10, 500-05-058936-004

Action dismissed.

January 21, 2013
Court of Appeal of Quebec (Montréal)

2013 QCCA 70, 500-09-018408-088

Appeal dismissed.

Memorandums of argument on application for leave to appeal

The memorandums of argument on an application for leave to appeal will be posted here 30 days after leave to appeal has been granted unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of the memorandum by filing out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.

If you have questions about a memorandum of argument or want to use a memorandum of argument, please contact the author of the memorandum of argument directly. Their name appears at the end of the memorandum of argument. The contact information for counsel is found in the “Counsel” tab of this page.

Downloadable PDFs

Not available

Factums on appeal

The factums of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here at least 2 weeks before the hearing unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of factums by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.

If you have questions about a factum or want permission to use a factum, please contact the author of the factum directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each factum.

Downloadable PDFs

Not available

Webcasts

Not available.

Date modified: 2025-02-27