avis 594 VA “Cou File No, ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: moe JOHN DOE (Plaintiff 1) iy \ and JANE DOE (Plaintiff 2) Plaintitts -and~ TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION, JOHN DOE FARE INSPECTOR 1, JOHN DOE FARE INSPECTOR 2, JOHN DOE FARE INSPECTOR 3, TORONTO POLICE SERVICES BOARD, and TORONTO POLICE SERVICE OFFICERS JOHN and JANE DOE Defendants STATEMENT OF CLAIM TO THE DEFENDANTS A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the plaintiffs. The claim made against you is set out in the following pages. IF YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, you or an Ontario lawyer acting for you must prepare a statement of defence in Form 18A prescribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure, serve it on the plaintiffs’ Jawyer or, where the plaintitfs do not have a lawyer, serve it on the plaintiffs, and file it, with proof of service, in this court office, WITHIN TWENTY DAYS after this statement of claim is served on you, if you are served in Ontario, IF you are served in another provines or territory of Canada or in the United States of America, the period for serving and filing your statement of defence is forty days. ff you are served outside Canada and the United States of America, the poriod is sixty days, Instead of serving and filing a statement of defence, you may serve and file a notice of intent to defend in Form 18B preseribed by the Rules of Civil Procedure. This will entitle you to ten more days within which to serve and file your statement of defence. IF YOU FAIL TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING, JUDGMENT MAY BE GIVEN AGAINST YOU IN YOUR ABSENCE AND WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU. IF ‘YOU WISH TO DEFEND THIS PROCEEDING BUT ARE UNABLE TO PAY LEGAL FEES, LEGAL AID MAY BE AVAILABLE TO YOU BY CONTACTING A LOCAL LEGAL AID OFFICE.IF YOU PAY THE PLAINTIFFS" CLAIM and costs within the time for sotving and filing your statement of defence, yon may move to have this proceeding dismissed by the court. If you believe the amount claimed for costs is excessive, you may pay the plaintiffs’ claim and costs and have the costs assessed by the court, TAKE NOTICE: THIS ACTION WILL AUTOMATICALLY BE DISMISSED if it has not been set down for trial or terminated by any means within five years after the action was commenced unless otherwise ordered by the court. owe Ward 34 07 Ft w Local registrar Address of 393 University Avenue, court office Toronto, ON MSG 1E6 TO: TORONTO TRANSIT COMMISSION 1900 Yonge Street Toronto, ON M4§ 1Z2 AND TO: JOHN DOE FARE INSPECTORS 1,2 &3 Toroato Transit Commission 1900 Yonge Street ‘Toronto, ON M48 1Z2 AND TO: TORONTO POLICE SERVICES BOARD 40 College Street ‘Toronto, ON MSG 23 AND TO: TORONTO POLICE SERVICE OFFICERS JANE AND JOHN DOE Toronto Police Services Board 40 College Street Toronto, ON M5G 2J3CLAIM 1, The Plaintiff, John Doe, claims against all Defendants: 2 ii, iii, vie general damages for negligence, assault, battery and pain and suffering in the amount of $1,000,000,00 (one miltion dollars): damages for breach of the Ontario Human Righls Code for discrimination, harassment and racial profiling in the amount of $250,000.00; damages for the negligent infliction of mental distress in the amount of $250,000.00; special damages in a sum to be disclosed before trial; aggravated damages in the amount of $500,000.00, punitive and/or exemplary damages in the amount of $500,000.00; ‘pre- and post-judgment interest pursuant to sections 128 and 129 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.0. 1990, ¢, 43; his costs of this action on substantial indemnity basis; and such further and other relief as this Honourable Coust deems just. The Plaintiff claims against the Toronto Police Services Board and the Defendant TPSB Officers damages of $250,000.00 for each violation pursuant to s. 24(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedams, and damages for misfeasance of office,3. The Plaintiff, Jane Doe, claims: i, damages pursuant to the Family Law Act, R.S.0, 1990, ¢, F.3 in the amount of $250,000.00; ii, special damages in a sum to be disclosed prior to trial; iii, pre-and post-judgment interest pursuant to sections 128 and 129 of the Courts of Justice Act, RS.O, 1990, 6. 43; iv. her costs of this action on a substantial indemnity basis; and v. such further and other relief as this Honourable Court deems just. INTRODUCTION 4, On February 18, 2018, Plaintiff 1 was a passonger on a TTC Strcetear when suddenly and without waming he was grabbed and thrown to the ground, face first, where he was pinned for an extended period of time by multiple TTC fare inspectors. 5. Plaintiff 1 was severcty assaulted and illegally detained by Toronto Transit Commission fare inspectors and later by multiple Toronto Police Service officers. He suffered serious, Physical and psychological injuries as a result of this incident. He was never charged with any offence or TTC By-Law infraction. THE PARTIES 6. Plaintiff 1 is 19 years old and a resident of the City of Toronto, in the Province of Ontario. He was the victim of unlawful detention, assault, battery, negligence, discrimination, harassment and racial profiling by the Defendants.7. PlaintitY2 is the mother of Plaintiff 1. She lives in the City of Toronto, She enjoys «close and Joving relationship with her son and is dependent on him for carc, companionship and guidance, 8, The Defendants John Doe 1, 2, and 3, are residents of the Provines of Ontario and were al all material Limes employed as fare inspectors for the Toronto Transit Commission, These Defendant TTC fare inspectors unlawfully assaulted and detained Plaintiff 1 without ‘warning, justification or excuse. They also acted negligently and thereby caused physical and psychological injuries to Plaintiff 1. These Defendants are thus liable to the Plaintiffs are unknown to the for the injuries they have sustained. These Defendants’ identi Plaintitts, 9, The Defendant Toronto ‘Transit Commission is a local passenger transportation commission operating within the Greater Toronto Area. The TTC is continued as a city board of the City of Toronto in accordance with section 394 of the Cis of Toronto Act, 2006, 8.0. 2006, c. 11, Sched. A., as amended, The Defendant TTC was at all material time responsible for the provision of transit services, inclnding the deployment of TTC fare inspectors. in the City of Toronto pursuant to TTC By-Law No. 1. The Defendant TTC is liable in respect of the wrongs committed by its employees. 10. The Defendant Toronto Police Service officers Jolm and Jane Doe, are residents of the Province of Ontario and were at all material times employed as police officers with the Defendant TPSB, The Defendant TPSB officers unlawfully assaulted and detained the Plaintiff without justification or excuse. The Defendants acted negligently toward Plaintiff land thereby caused hi juries. These Defendants arc liable to the Pi iff For assault and battery, misfeasance in public office, negligence and causing nervous shockand emotional distress. They are farther liabic for breaches of the Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and for the resulting harms to the PlaintiffS accordingly. The Defendants’ identities are unknown to the Plaintiffs. 11, Tho Defendant Toronto Police Services Board was at alf material times the employer of all police officers in the Toronto Potice Service and, as such, is vicariously liable for the claims of the Plaintiffs pursuant to s. 50(L) of the Police Services Act, RSP 1990, C. p. 15, 12. The Plaintiffs state that the Defendant TPSB officers, and the Defendant TPSB individually and/or collectively committed unlawful detention, assault and battery, misfoasance in public office, negligence, infliction of mental distress and breaches of the Charter and the Ontario Human Rights Code against Plaintiff 1. THE FACTS: 13, On February 18, 2018, Plaintiff | was a TTC passenger lawfully travelling on the 512 streetcar westbound near the intersection of St, Clair and Bathurst in the City of Toronto, As he arrived at the St. Clair and Bathurst westbound streetcar stop, the Plaintiff 1 prepared to exit the streetcar. 14. As Plaintiff | tumed to exit the streotear, suddenly and without warming, one or more of the Defendant TTC fare inspectors grabbed him causing him great shock and mental distress. Tn fear of his safety, Plaintiff 1 got up and tried to exit the strectear bat was grabbed and pushed by 3 unidentified TTC fare inspectors without notice or warning.