In some cases,false accusers may be sued in civil court for malicious prosecution to recover legal fees and other expenses,however,claims for "pain,suffering and humiliation" is usually never awarded in Canadian courts,unlike American courts where judgments can soar into the millions of dollars.
I'm sure you know how to use google... In case you don't... https://firearmlegaldefence.com/gun-...apons-charges/
Don't worry, go plinking, be happy!!
I always wondered how many more "safe kisses" your firearms would accumulate after being handled be the police several times.
I can see how insurance could come in handy but I'm also wary of the sudden appearance of several insurance-for-gunowner companies popping up in the last few years. I think we should tread carefully before widely embracing gun insurance. It only takes the bureaucratic stroke of a pen to make gun insurance MANDATORY and I for one am reaching the tipping point in regard to 'fees' for my hobby. When you factor together courses, licensing, range membership, club level safety, initiation, storage (Security), ammunition......it starts to really add up. Insurance can be a slippery slope when government takes charge.
Canada ended when Trudeau began.
Yes, the tort of malicious prosecution exists, but it's rarely used against private citizens. You could pursue legal costs and $ for reputational damages. The acts are defamatory in nature, after all.
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at with pain and suffering.
So, yes, in at least some jurisdictions you could sue in civil court. The police could go after them crimininally.
Pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life damages are awarded every day in courts across Canada, although I suspect damages are conceptualized somewhat differently here.
Aggravated and punitive damages could be pursued for something like this b/c it's so egregious.
I would use every tool in my toolbox to go after someone who did this to me and make them pay. Big time.
Last edited by bcbravo2zero; 05-12-2017 at 01:41 PM.
"Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest." - Mohandas Gandhi
My understanding is, "pain and suffering" actually has to be pain and suffering in some sort of physical way in order to be accepted as a legitimate charge. Such as a dog bite, lasting injury for an assault to car accident etc. It is not awarded for mental 'pain and suffering'.
Where the defendant could have traction is punitive damages.
With regards to going back after the person who filed the false charge, if the underwriter felt it was malicious prosecution and there were reasonable prospects of a decision in favor of Underwriters and there were assets to go after they might recommend it however it would only be in respect of costs and disbursements. No damages would be pursued since there is no coverage under this program for such an action.