Casavant v BC General Employees’ Union

Background:

• Bryce Casavant, a former BC Conservation Officer and union member, was disciplined in 2015 for refusing to euthanize two bear cubs.
• The BCGEU filed grievances, leading to a 2016 Settlement where Casavant:
  • Had disciplinary records removed.
  • Accepted a new position with the same salary and benefits.
  • Received funding for further education.
  • Released the union and employer from any claims related to his past employment.
• Casavant later sought to set aside the Settlement and be reinstated as a Conservation Officer.

Legal Proceedings:

• Casavant #1 (2020 BCCA 159): The BC Court of Appeal found the grievance process invalid but left the Settlement intact.
• Casavant #2 (2022 BCSC 1573, aff’d 2023 BCCA 320): Courts ruled the Settlement was binding despite jurisdictional flaws.

Current Petition:

• Casavant sought declarations that:
  1. He had a solicitor-client relationship with BCGEU lawyer Esther Ostrower.
  2. He was entitled to unredacted grievance files without going through BCGEU’s Privacy Officer.
• Court’s Decision:
  • No solicitor-client relationship existed; union lawyers represent the union, not individual members.
  • Legal advice alone does not create a solicitor-client relationship.
  • Casavant is not entitled to the grievance files under solicitor-client privilege but can seek them via privacy laws.
  • Petition dismissed; the Settlement remains binding.
  • No monetary award specified.