With respect, I think the judge fell into error in concluding that a claim of misfeasance in public office can only be made out against one public official. Certainly, it is intrinsic to the tort that it be committed by a person exercising public “functions” or “offices” and the City is not an office holder: see Moses v. Lower Nicola Indian Band, 2015 BCCA 61 at para. 44. To conclude the claim failed because it was premised on several members of the planning department acting improperly, rather than one in particular, is an error. I am aware of no principle in law that would prevent two or more individuals acting in concert from committing the tort. Indeed, embedded in the judge’s findings of fact must be a finding that several members of the planning department were acting in concert.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.