Article content material

A former RM of Sherwood councillor, who was twice discovered not responsible of breach of belief, has largely been denied the greater than $350,000 reimbursement he sought from the municipality.

Article content material

Tim Probe, introduced an software for abstract judgment earlier than the Regina Courtroom of King’s Bench in a bid to recoup among the cash he spent on authorized payments and cash misplaced whereas defending himself.

Article content material

As quoted within the determination of Justice John Morrall on Probe’s software, dated Jan. 9 and just lately printed publicly on-line, “Alongside his travelled path… (he) needed to defend a number of actions that value him an excessive amount of cash.”

“I agree,” the choose commented, in his opening line.

Nevertheless, regardless of his settlement on that entrance, Morrall ordered the RM, which on this case acted because the defendant, to pay Probe solely a fraction of the compensation sought.

An agreed assertion of info, summarized inside the determination, outlined the fee Probe wished.

Article content material

His authorized sagas started with a proposed improvement referred to as Wascana Village, the origins of which date again to 2012.

For prices related to authorized illustration at an inquiry into that proposed improvement, the previous councillor sought compensation of $49,998.98. He additionally sought compensation of $52,724.64 he spent in authorized prices combating the RM’s efforts to claw again a full reimbursement he initially obtained on that entrance — a case leading to a 2020 settlement that noticed Probe pay the RM again $30,195.

In October of 2016, he was charged criminally with breach of belief and municipal corruption.

In a separate continuing in 2017, he was present in breach of battle of curiosity guidelines within the Municipalities Act and the next yr a courtroom ordered him disqualified from council in consequence. He appealed this, however then deserted his enchantment, having racked up $26,076.93 in authorized charges, for which he additionally sought compensation.

Article content material

He was not paid his councillor honorariums from October 2016 to January 2018. Whereas he didn’t attend conferences, he did work in some capability, and on that time Morrall’s determination notes: “Counsel have agreed the full quantity that could possibly be claimed from the RM with respect to this concern is $27,150.00.”

In 2018, he was acquitted of associated felony fees. The Crown appealed the breach of belief acquittal, a brand new trial was ordered, and Probe was once more acquitted in 2021.

The previous councillor paid authorized charges of $197,145.57 in relation to the felony fees, for which he additionally sought reimbursement.

By his software for abstract judgment, Probe sought orders that the RM pay him quantities totalling $353,096.12, plus authorized prices related to the applying itself, as famous within the determination.

Article content material

Probe argued he was a councillor till January 2018 and was entitled to his honorariums as such. As effectively, he argued he was entitled to all aforementioned authorized charges “due to his good religion actions whereas he was a councillor for the RM,” in line with the choice’s abstract.

The RM argued it had no obligation to pay him a dime, and that Probe ought to be ordered to pay it $2,000 in prices, regarding the applying.

Morrall’s prolonged determination explored the problems at play, and the outcome was not overly beneficial for the previous councillor.

The courtroom didn’t order the RM to pay for any of the authorized prices Probe sought.

Nevertheless, the choose dominated the RM was on the hook concerning honorariums, and ordered it to pay Probe the $27,150.

Article content material

Morrall famous the previous councillor’s “success was fairly restricted when it comes to the full declare, each when it comes to greenback quantity and the preponderance of authorized points.” However the courtroom did order the RM to pay him $1,000 in authorized prices related to the applying, as effectively.

[email protected]

Wish to know the way we determine what to cowl and the way editorial choices are made on the Regina Chief-Submit and Saskatoon StarPhoenix? Get the weekly Letter From the Editor publication from the Editor in Chief Russell Wangersky and be part of the dialogue on what goes into overlaying information and delivering commentary, each in print and on-line. Click on right here to subscribe.