Final chapter fizzles over flood gun seizures

A proposed class action lawsuit seeking $5 million from the RCMP for the unlawful seizure of firearms during the 2013 flood has been dropped due to lack of interest.

Lawyer Clint Docken said Monday the claim against the Mounties was discontinued after no one other than the representative couple came forward to join the lawsuit.

“We had heard from a couple who were prepared to act as representative plaintiff, we essentially didn’t hear from others,” Docken said.

“I had no one come forward other than the representative (plaintiffs).”

To proceed with a class action claim, a party needs to identify a group of similarly aggrieved individuals.

Despite what Docken “considered illegal actions on the part of the RCMP,” no other potential class members came forward.

He said the amount of damages each individual plaintiff would have been due wasn’t enough for plaintiff Jane White, and her husband Donald, to continue with the lawsuit.

“In this case, an individual claim wouldn’t have been economical,” Docken said. “In class actions, there’s strength in numbers.”

He said small groups can proceed with class action claims, but only where the likely damages would be high.

“It can be a small class with large damages or a large class with small damages,” Docken explained.

“We had a small damages class (action) and we didn’t have a large class.”

A discontinuance of the lawsuit was filed last week with neither the plaintiffs nor the defendants, the RCMP and Attorney General of Canada, incurring any of the other’s costs.

In the claim filed by Docken in February 2015, it was alleged the Mounties breached the Charter rights of High River residents by going into their homes and seizing firearms after the residences were evacuated.

“The RCMP’s actions were outside what was sanctioned by the Alberta Emergency Management Act and beyond what was necessary or reasonable in the circumstances,” the statement of claim said. “The defendant’s conduct ... was without care and in disregard of the rights and security of the plaintiff and class, and took advantage of vulnerable peoples faced with dire circumstances.”

Because the class action was never certified by a court, no statements of defence were ever filed in response to the unproven allegations.