Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Plaintiffs alleged negligence, Charter violations, and wrongful death following a fatal police shooting.

• Attempted to add multiple defendants, including paramedics and municipal authorities, late in the proceedings.

• Court found claims against new defendants either time-barred, inadmissible, or unsupported by sufficient facts.

• Proposed Charter claims under sections 7 and 12 were disallowed as redundant or unsupported.

• Limited permission granted to amend existing pleadings to add more factual detail and a Charter claim under section 8.

• Costs were awarded only to the paramedics; all other parties were to bear their own costs.

Facts and outcome of the case

Kyaw Naing Din, a man living with schizophrenia, was fatally shot by RCMP officers in his family’s home in Maple Ridge, British Columbia, on August 11, 2019. His siblings, Yin Yin Hia Din and Min Aung, had called 911 seeking assistance in getting Kyaw to the hospital. Despite Kyaw being calm and non-threatening, four RCMP officers and two paramedics entered the home and proceeded to his bedroom. Without announcing their presence, police used a taser, and then two officers fired their guns, killing Kyaw. The plaintiffs claimed the entry was uninvited and that the escalation was unnecessary. They later also alleged that an officer, Constable Jung, laughed while Kyaw’s body was being removed from the home.

Following the incident, investigations were conducted by the Independent Investigations Office (IIO) and the BC Coroners Service. Both bodies concluded no criminal wrongdoing. The plaintiffs, disagreeing with the findings, alleged false and fabricated testimony by police and paramedics and claimed a cover-up.

Initially represented by counsel, the plaintiffs later acted for themselves and applied to significantly expand their lawsuit. They sought to add more defendants, including paramedics, additional RCMP officers, and the City of Maple Ridge. They also proposed new claims involving Charter breaches, trespass, and negligence.

The Supreme Court of British Columbia (Justice Elwood) reviewed the plaintiffs’ extensive proposed amendments. The court ruled that none of the proposed new defendants could be added. Claims against paramedics and new officers were time-barred or based on inadmissible evidence from the IIO and Coroners inquest. Allegations against the Ridge Meadows RCMP Detachment and the City of Maple Ridge failed due to legal misapplication of vicarious liability laws and absence of any pleaded duty of care.

While dismissing the attempt to expand the defendant list, the court allowed the plaintiffs to amend the existing claim against current defendants. They were permitted to include further details of the August 11 events, additional allegations of negligence, and a Charter claim for an alleged unlawful entry (section 8). However, claims under sections 7 and 12 of the Charter were disallowed, as the conduct at issue was already covered by the negligence claims and did not justify separate Charter remedies.

The plaintiffs were required to revise and resubmit their pleading within 45 days, adhering to specific formatting and content guidelines. Costs were awarded to the proposed paramedics for successfully opposing their addition as parties. All other parties were ordered to bear their own costs, given the mixed success of the application.