Judge Reserves Decision in Former Saskatoon Police Officers' Reinstatement Case
A Saskatoon Court of King's Bench judge has reserved her decision in a case involving two former Saskatoon Police Service officers seeking reinstatement after their 2025 dismissals. The officers' lawyer is asking the court to force provincial authorities to hear their appeals, arguing that procedural errors by counsel should not prevent his clients from having their cases properly considered.
Legal Arguments Focus on Procedural Compliance
During a chambers hearing on Friday, lawyer Steven Seiferling told Justice Natasha Crooks that his clients, former constables Dylan Kemp and Jason Garland, should not be punished for what he called an "inadvertent error" in the appeals process. Seiferling is asking the court to order the Ministry of Community Safety and the Saskatchewan Police Commission to appoint a hearing officer to determine whether the officers should be re-hired.
"Constables Kemp and Garland cannot and should not be punished for my inadvertent error," Seiferling stated during the proceedings.
The legal dispute centers on whether the officers properly filed their appeals within the required timeframe. According to court documents, Seiferling sent notices of the officers' intent to appeal their September 2025 dismissals to the Saskatoon Police Service and the Saskatoon Police Association in the same month. However, due to what he described as an "error of counsel," notice was not sent to the Saskatchewan Police Commission, which is responsible for appointing appeal hearing officers.
Background of the Dismissals
The two officers were among five Saskatoon police members suspended with pay in November 2024 while their conduct at an off-duty party two months earlier was investigated. According to CBC reports, sources alleged that a member of the police service's Emergency Response Unit assaulted a female officer at the party, which was hosted by another member of that unit. It was also claimed that a member of an outlaw motorcycle gang attended the gathering, potentially jeopardizing police undercover operations.
Three officers were ultimately fired over the incident in September 2025, with Kemp and Garland now seeking to appeal those dismissals through the proper administrative channels.
Jurisdictional Dispute and Legal Arguments
When Seiferling contacted the Saskatchewan Police Commission in October 2025 to inquire about appointing a hearing officer, he was informed that the appeals were "out of time." He was then directed to the Ministry of Community Safety, which told him it did not have jurisdiction to make such appointments.
"They kept pushing it back and forth," Seiferling told the court on Friday, describing the jurisdictional dispute between the two provincial bodies.
Seiferling argued that if the ministry and commission want to challenge the timing of the appeal notices, they should do so before an appointed hearing officer as outlined in the Police Act, 1990. He maintained that serving the police service and police association with appeal notices demonstrated the officers' clear intentions and constituted "imperfect compliance" with legislation that should still allow their cases to proceed.
"That should be something that would be raised properly with the hearing officer. The hearing officers have wide jurisdiction," Seiferling emphasized during his arguments.
Opposing Legal Position
Christoph Meier, the lawyer representing the Ministry of Community Safety, countered that the officers' failure to file appeals within the proper timeframe represents a "substantial" issue rather than a minor procedural matter. He argued that there is nothing in the relevant legislation that allows for extensions to the appeals timeline, suggesting that the officers may have missed their opportunity for administrative review of their dismissals.
The case highlights the complex interplay between administrative law, police discipline procedures, and individual employment rights within Saskatchewan's law enforcement framework. Justice Crooks has taken the matter under advisement and will issue her decision at a later date, determining whether the former officers will get another chance to argue for their reinstatement through the province's established police appeal process.
