Executive Summary – Key Legal & Evidentiary Issues

• Plaintiff alleges wrongful termination by the City of Delta, claiming breach of contract and lack of good faith in dismissal process.

• Claims of defamation are brought against Councillor Kruger based on alleged remarks made post-termination.

• Dispute arises over whether Delta had a duty of care to prevent Kruger from breaching confidentiality under the Community Charter.

• Defendants successfully move to strike portions of pleadings citing no reasonable cause of action in negligence.

• Legal test from Anns/Cooper framework used to evaluate existence of novel duty of care.

• Court rejects plaintiff’s attempt to examine the Mayor for discovery, ruling he is not an appropriate representative under the Civil Rules.

Facts of the Case

Paramjit Singh Grewal, a former senior municipal employee, brought a civil action against both the City of Delta and City Councillor Dylan Kruger following his termination without cause in March 2024. Grewal had held two successive director-level roles with the City, most recently serving as Director of Economic Development and Stakeholder Relations in the Mayor’s Office. His employment contract was scheduled to run until December 31, 2026, with provisions for early termination and severance.

The termination occurred shortly after an in camera municipal council meeting. Grewal alleged that discussions at that meeting led to his dismissal. He further relied on an audio recording of a conversation between Kruger and a third party (Randy Mann), in which Kruger allegedly made defamatory remarks about Grewal.

Grewal sued the City for breach of contract, breach of duty of good faith and honesty, negligence, and vicarious liability for Kruger’s alleged actions. Against Kruger personally, Grewal pursued a claim in defamation.

Arguments and Court’s Analysis

The litigation included two procedural motions brought by the defendants:

1. Application to Strike Pleadings
   The City of Delta and Kruger sought to strike portions of Grewal’s pleadings under Rule 9-5 of the Supreme Court Civil Rules, which allows courts to remove parts of pleadings that are frivolous, vexatious, or disclose no reasonable cause of action.

   The focus was on Grewal’s negligence claim, where he alleged the City failed to ensure that Kruger complied with confidentiality obligations under Section 117 of the Community Charter and the City’s Code of Ethics. The court rejected this claim, ruling that:

   • No private law duty of care exists on municipalities to enforce internal confidentiality among council members.

   • The breach of statutory obligations (like the Community Charter) does not, on its own, give rise to tort liability.

   • Other remedies (e.g., defamation suit or internal council discipline) were more appropriate and already available.

   Consequently, the court struck the negligence claim and related allegations from Grewal’s Notice of Civil Claim and Reply.

2. Examination for Discovery of the Mayor
   Grewal sought to examine Mayor George Harvie for discovery, asserting that he was directly involved in employment matters and had managed Grewal’s work. Delta objected, proposing the City Manager (who handled the termination) as the more appropriate witness.

   The court agreed with Delta, finding:

   • The Mayor is not an “officer, agent, or employee” for discovery purposes under the Civil Rules.

   • Courts in similar cases have consistently ruled that elected officials, like mayors, cannot bind a municipality through discovery testimony.

   • Even if the Mayor were eligible, the court would exercise its discretion to prevent the discovery due to lack of “special circumstances” and potential prejudice.

Outcome

• The plaintiff’s negligence claim was struck as disclosing no reasonable cause of action.

• The Mayor’s discovery appointment was set aside, and the City Manager was substituted as the proper representative.

• Costs were ordered in the cause, meaning they will be decided at the conclusion of the trial.