Skip to main content
Welcome to
super saver spring
offer ends april 20
save over $140
save over 85%
$0.99
per week for 24 weeks
Welcome to
super saver spring
$0.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Ivan Henry, who was wrongfully convicted of sexual assault in 1983, leaves B.C. Supreme Court during a lunch break in Vancouver, B.C., on Monday August 31, 2015.

Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press

A man who was wrongfully imprisoned for nearly three decades has had his compensation award cut by the British Columbia Supreme Court.

The court ordered the B.C. government in June to pay Ivan Henry $8-million in damages after he spent 27 years in prison for sexual assault before a court overturned the conviction in 2010.

Mr. Henry sued the City of Vancouver and the federal and provincial governments, but settled with the city and federal government for an undisclosed amount in 2015 while his case against the province went ahead.

Story continues below advertisement

The province then went back to court, asking it to deduct the amount of those undisclosed settlements from the total damages award.

Justice Christopher Hinkson said in a ruling issued last week that the lawsuit against the three levels of government was indivisible, so the claims should also be unified.

"While the allegations against the settling defendants and non-settling defendants were based upon different allegations of fault, the relief sought was essentially the same: compensation for a wrongful conviction and some 27 years of incarceration," he wrote. "I find that at least some of the settlement funds paid by the settling defendants to the plaintiff must be deducted from the damages that I have found the plaintiff is owed by the province."

The ruling did not say how much the city and federal government settled for or how much the province must now pay Mr. Henry. Mr. Henry's lawyers declined to comment on the decision or whether they will appeal.

They argued in court that Mr. Henry should be awarded as much as $43-million for damages.

Justice Hinkson wrote in his original ruling on the compensation award that Mr. Henry likely would have been acquitted during a trial in 1983 if he had received the disclosure he was entitled to.

The judge said the Crown's decision to withhold information demonstrated a "shocking disregard" for his rights and "seriously infringed" on his right to a fair trial.

Story continues below advertisement

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies