C-169 - Conduct Appeal

The Appellant appealed a Decision by a Conduct Authority (Respondent) that he failed to perform his required duties in a drug-trafficking investigation, contrary to section 4.2 of the RCMP Code of Conduct, and that he was involved in a vehicle pursuit, driving in a dangerous manner in violation of RCMP policy and training, contrary to sections 4.6 and 7.1 of the RCMP Code of Conduct. The Respondent imposed global conduct measures including the forfeitures of two days’ pay and eight days’ leave, a direction that the Appellant be ineligible for promotion for one year and directions to take courses and an understudy rotation.  

On appeal, the Appellant argued that the Decision was clearly unreasonable and was made in a procedurally unfair manner.

The appeal was presented 75 days after the Appellant confirmed receipt of the Decision. As the appeal was presented beyond the 14-day limitation period to file an appeal, the Appellant requested that the limitation period be extended. 

The ERC considered a recent Federal Court (FC) decision, Mohamed v. Canada (Attorney General) 2026 FC 735, specifically the FC’s obiter comments regarding the legal test to apply when considering whether to grant a time limit extension in an appeal pursuant to paragraph 29(e) of Commissioner’s Standing Orders (Grievances and Appeals) (CSO (Grievances and Appeals)). The ERC concluded that the four factor test in Canada (Attorney General) v. Pentney 2008 FC 96 was appropriate for determining whether to grant an extension of time limit under the CSO (Grievances and Appeals).

The ERC found that after balancing the relevant four factors to apply when considering an extension, it concluded that it was not in the interests of justice to grant one. While the appeal disclosed an arguable case and the Respondent was not prejudiced by consideration of the merits of the appeal, the Appellant did not show that he had an ongoing intention to appeal and he did not provide a reasonable explanation for the delay.  

The ERC recommends that the appeal be dismissed because it is untimely.