Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• The Federal Court reviewed the reasonableness of a grievance decision by Correctional Service Canada under Vavilov principles.

• Classification of the inmate's grievance as "discrimination" (code 14) excluded key non-discrimination issues from analysis.

• Mr. Lill challenged the rejection of his transfer and security downgrade requests, citing procedural unfairness and retaliatory actions.

• The Court found the decision-maker failed to consider essential parts of the grievance concerning security reclassification and transfer denials.

• Evidence in the Certified Tribunal Record omitted several documents that were central to Mr. Lill's arguments.

• The Court concluded the decision was unreasonable and remitted the matter to a new decision-maker, awarding mid-level Tariff B costs.

Facts and outcome of the case

Christopher Lill, an Indigenous federal inmate serving a life sentence for first-degree murder, sought judicial review of a correctional grievance decision. In 2021, his security classification was raised from minimum to medium, and he was urgently transferred from Archambault Institution to Cowansville Institution. Over the following years, Mr. Lill repeatedly applied for a reduction in his security level and a transfer back to a minimum-security facility. These applications were denied.

On May 15, 2022, after one such denial, Mr. Lill filed a final-level grievance (Grief 2058), stating the refusals were retaliatory in response to prior complaints he had made, including to the Office of the Correctional Investigator and the Canadian Human Rights Commission. He attached supporting documents and alleged procedural unfairness, use of discriminatory risk assessment tools, and failure to consider relevant information. Initially coded as a grievance concerning transfer (Code 08B), the grievance was later reclassified under “Discrimination” (Code 14), which changed how it was handled administratively.

The decision-maker (the “Décideur”) ultimately rejected the grievance, focusing solely on the discrimination and harassment aspects and disregarding the procedural and classification-related issues Mr. Lill had raised. Mr. Lill then brought the matter before the Federal Court, arguing that the decision failed to address essential elements of his grievance.

The Court agreed with Mr. Lill, finding that the decision-maker had unreasonably narrowed the scope of the grievance and had not considered key documents or arguments related to the security classification and transfer refusals. The Court emphasized that under Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v Vavilov, administrative decisions must demonstrate justification, transparency, and intelligibility. The failure to consider the full substance of Mr. Lill’s grievance rendered the decision unreasonable.

The Federal Court granted the judicial review, annulled the original decision, and ordered that the grievance be reassessed by a different decision-maker. The Court also awarded costs to Mr. Lill, calculated according to the middle range of Column III of Tariff B of the Federal Courts Rules. No damages were awarded.