Judge Denies Appeal Hearing for Dismissed Saskatoon Police Officers
A Saskatoon judge has ruled that two former Saskatoon Police Service officers will not be granted an appeal hearing to potentially regain their jobs, citing a critical failure to comply with legal filing requirements. The decision, delivered by Justice Natasha Crooks, centers on what has been described as an "error of counsel" that derailed the officers' chances of reinstatement.
Legal Misstep Leads to Nullified Appeal
The case involves former officers Dylan Kemp and Jason Garland, who were dismissed from the Saskatoon Police Service in September 2025. Their lawyer, Steven Seiferling, attempted to appeal the dismissals but failed to serve the Saskatchewan Police Commission (SPC) with the necessary appeal notice within the mandated 30-day period as required by Saskatchewan's Police Act, 1990. Seiferling acknowledged this oversight, attributing it to an "error of counsel," and argued that his clients should not be penalized for his mistake.
In a 21-page decision released on Friday, Justice Crooks rejected Seiferling's request to order the Ministry of Community Safety and the SPC to appoint a hearing officer. She emphasized that the statutory requirements were not met, rendering the appeal a nullity. "Given the applicants' non-compliance with the statutory requirements in submitting their appeals, the minister owes no duty to the applicants to designate a hearing officer to hear these appeals," the decision stated. "As such, the appeal is a nullity as it only comes to exist if it is commenced in compliance with the legislation."
Substantive vs. Procedural Issues
Seiferling contended that if there were issues with the timing of the appeal notice, they should be addressed before an appointed hearing officer as per the Police Act. However, lawyers for the ministry and the police service argued that the improper filing was a substantial issue, not merely a procedural one. Christoph Meier, representing the ministry, described it as "substantial," while SPS lawyer Kristin MacLean pointed out that the Police Act clearly outlines the process for filing appeals, including strict time frames.
Justice Crooks agreed with this interpretation, stating in her decision, "I am satisfied that the time limit reflects the legislature's intent that it serves as a condition of appeal. As such, it must be regarded as a matter of substantive law." This ruling underscores the importance of adhering to legal deadlines in such cases, leaving little room for exceptions based on counsel errors.
Background on the Dismissals
The dismissals stem from an incident in November 2024, when five Saskatoon Police Service officers were suspended with pay following an investigation into their conduct at an off-duty party two months prior. According to a CBC report, sources alleged that a member of the SPS Emergency Response Unit assaulted a female officer at the party, which was hosted by another unit member. Additionally, it was claimed that a member of an outlaw motorcycle gang was present, potentially compromising the police undercover program.
This context adds weight to the legal proceedings, as the officers' attempts to appeal their dismissals were met with strict judicial scrutiny. The judge's decision highlights the rigorous standards applied in police disciplinary matters, ensuring that procedural rules are upheld to maintain integrity within the justice system.
As a result of this ruling, Dylan Kemp and Jason Garland will not have the opportunity to present their case for reinstatement, marking a significant setback in their efforts to return to the force. The outcome serves as a cautionary tale about the critical nature of legal compliance in appeals processes, particularly within the framework of police governance and accountability.
