Those seeking a class-action lawsuit over police conduct at the G20 summit may be one step closer to their goal after a decision by Canada's top court in the case of a lawyer strip-searched because of false suspicions he was plotting to hit Jean Chrétien with a pie.

Vancouver lawyer Cameron Ward was arrested Aug. 1, 2002, because he matched the description from a tip police received about a man planning to throw a pie at then-prime minister Chrétien. The lawyer was arrested, spent hours behind bars and was strip-searched.

Friday’s Supreme Court ruling upheld $5,000 in damages against British Columbia for breaching Ward’s charter rights. Essentially, it means people whose rights are infringed can seek damages even if they suffered no actual loss and even if authorities acted in good faith.

“This is quite a breakthrough,” said Nathalie Des Rosiers, general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.

“It clarifies the law and certainly then makes the likelihood of a class-action less daunting and more susceptible to success.”

Des Rosiers says the decision eliminates a legal obstacle on the road to a class-action lawsuit by removing the necessity to establish some measure of intent by the police officers, which can be difficult to prove.

“It’s particularly interesting receiving that decision right after the G20, when it could be used right away,” Des Rosiers said. Nearly 1,000 people were arrested in Toronto before and during the G20 summit in late June.

Lawyer sees link

It’s a potential application that did not go unnoticed by the lawyer at the centre of the Supreme Court's ruling.

“If people are able to prove that they were wrongly detained or arrested —or in some cases perhaps even strip-searched — they may be able to recover monetary compensation, which would also act as a deterrence in certain cases,” Ward noted in relation to G20 arrests.

But so far, pursuit of a G20 class-action lawsuit has been stymied by a lack of a lead plaintiff, one person required to represent the larger group.

While David Midanik, one lawyer pursuing a class-action lawsuit related to police action at the G20, says he’s received a lot of inquiries but many are unwilling to represent the lawsuit due largely to mistrust of the system.

“They believe because police behaved the way they did … that there’s little or no chance of a court — which they see as part of the same thing — giving them justice, so they’re reluctant to co-operate,” said Midanik.

Midanik believes, however, that though the ruling doesn’t mark a legal change, it could make more people feel comfortable enough to come out of the woodwork with their claims.