02-Apr-19

Amended pursuant to Supreme Court Civil Rule 6-1(a)

Vancouver Original filed on June 30, 2017

NO. S176219
VANCOUVER REGISTRY

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

BETWEEN:

Christine Sandhu

PLAINTIFF

AND:

Cameron Hennessy, Samuel Murphy and The Three Brits Enterprises Ltd.

DEFENDANTS

AMENDED NOTICE OF CIVIL CLAIM

CLAIM OF THE PLAINTIFF

Part 1: STATEMENT OF FACTS

Parties

1. The plaintiff, Christine Sandhu (the “Plaintiff”) is a librarian library technician with
an address for service in this litigation c/o 2805 Dohler Road, Smithers, British
Columbia V0J 2N4 at: 340 – 1122 Mainland Street, Vancouver, BC V6B 5L1.

2. The Defendant Cameron Hennessy is a restaurant server/bar tender whose

current address is unknown to the Plaintiff.

3. The Defendants Cameron Hennessy and Samuel Murphy have each been an
employee of The Three Brits Enterprises Ltd (the "Three Brits").

2. Ms. Sandhu previously worked as a host leader at Cactus Club Café, in the
English Bay location.

3. Ms. Sandhu was a British Columbia resident until 2017, at which time she moved
to Toronto where she currently resides
 -2-

4. The defendant Three Brits Enterprises Ltd. is a business registered in British

Columbia with incorporation number BC0637363 and a registered address of
suite 1800-510 West Georgia Street, Vancouver BC V6B 0M3 corporation based
in Vancouver. Three Brits owns and operates a public house the Three Brits Pub,
a restaurant and bar, located at 1780 Davie Street, Vancouver, BC V6G 1W2 (the
“Three Brits Pub”).

5. As of on or about June 30, 2015, the defendant Samuel Murphy was worked as
the general manager on shift at Three Brits Pub. He is currently employed in a
management position with the Donnelly Group, the owner of Three Brits.

6. As of June 30, 2015, the defendant Cameron Hennessey was at or around that
time employed worked as a bar manager, server and bartender at the Three Brits
Pub. His current employment is unknown.

8. On June 30, 2015, the Plaintiff was employed as a server at the Cactus Club
Cafe, located at 357 Davie Street, Vancouver, British Columbia. The Plaintiff
considered the Defendants Cameron Hennessy and Samuel Murphy to be
friendly colleagues in the restaurant industry.

9. On June 30, 2015, the Plaintiff attended the Three Brits Pub and consumed at
least one alcoholic drink while she was with the Defendant Cameron Hennessy.

10. The Plaintiff believes that she was served with Gamma Hydroxybutyrate ("GHB")
while drinking with the Defendant Cameron Hennessy at the Three Brits Pub.

11. The Defendant Samuel Murphy was in a management position and had some
control over the amount, apportionment and service of alcoholic beverages at the
Three Brits Pub.

12. The Defendant Samuel Murphy was negligent in the following ways:

a) Failure to take appropriate or reasonable steps while serving alcohol to the

Plaintiff; and

b) Failure to take appropriate or reasonable steps to restore and ensure

ongoing personal safety and security at the Three Brits Pub.

13. As a direct result of the serving of GHB at the Three Brits Pub, the Plaintiff
experienced extreme fatigue and loss of consciousness.

14. The Defendant Cameron Hennessy knew or ought to have known that the Plaintiff
was either badly impaired as a result of either over-consumption of alcohol or as a
result of service of GHB in her alcoholic drink.

15. The Defendant Cameron Hennessy sexually assaulted the Plaintiff (the "Sexual
Assault").
 -3-

16. As a result of the Sexual Assault, the Plaintiff has suffered from various injuries
including:

a) Physical pain and suffering, including bruises and soft tissue injuries;

b) Mental anguish and distress;

c) Stress and anxiety;

d) Fear, nightmares and traumatic memories;

e) Depression and loss of confidence/self-esteem;

t) Impaired ability to trust; and

17. The Plaintiff reported the Sexual Assault to Vancouver Police Department (the
"VPD") and requested that reasonable steps be taken in order to complete a
thorough investigation of the incident, including that video surveillance from the
Three Brits Pub be obtained.

18. The Three Brits Pub did not take adequate or reasonable steps to ensure the
ongoing safety of the Plaintiff during the VPD investigation and failed to produce
any relevant video surveillance.

19. The Three Brits Pub was negligent in the following ways:

a) Failure to ensure the personal safety of a patron at the Three Brits Pub;

b) Failure to implement or follow any guidelines or policy for the appropriate

response to the report of a sexual assault;

c) Failure to provide available evidence during a police investigation; and

d) Failure to take appropriate or reasonable steps to restore and ensure

ongomg personal safety and security at the Three Brits Pub.

20. As a result of the negligence of the Three Brits Pub, the Plaintiff has suffered
various injuries including:

a) Loss of employment;

b) Shame and humiliation;

c) Fear and anxiety;

d) Stress and social pressure;

e) Loss of enjoyment of life and purpose; and

 -4-

g) Such other conditions as may in the future be revealed by evidence.

21. As a result of the sexual assault and the negligence of the Defendants, the Plaintiff
has experienced pain and suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, loss of intimacy in
relationships and damage to sexual health.

22. As a result of the sexual assault and the negligence of the Defendants, the Plaintiff
has suffered from and continues to suffer from significant emotional trauma, which
makes it difficult for her to sustain trust in various relationships, including in her
place of employment.

23. As a result of the sexual assault and the negligence of the Defendants, the Plaintiff
suffered and will continue to suffer the loss of wages, loss of tip income and a loss
of ability, capacity, and opportunity to earn income.

24. As a result of the sexual assault and the negligence of the Defendants, the Plaintiff
has needed to undergo various treatments and has incurred expenses associated
with the receipt of those treatments, as well as other losses and expenses.

Summary of the Claim

7. Ms. Sandhu claims damages against Mr. Hennessy for a sexual assault. The
sexual assault occurred on June 30, 2015 in Mr. Hennessy’s apartment. Shortly
before the assault, Ms. Sandhu and Mr. Hennessey attended Three Brits Pub,
where Mr. Hennessy was employed as a server, although he was not on shift.

8. Mr. Murphy was the general manager of Three Brits Pub. As described below, Mr.
Murphy and the Three Brits Pub created and maintained conditions where Ms.
Sandhu was put at risk of being sexually assaulted.

9. Ms. Sandhu brings a claim for damages against Mr. Hennessey for assault and
battery, sexual assault and battery, and conspiracy.

10. Ms. Sandhu brings a damages claim against Three Brits and Mr. Murphy for
conspiracy and negligence in intentionally and / or recklessly creating and
maintaining conditions that materially contributed to the sexual assault.

Culture at the Three Brits Pub

11. Three Brits Pub knows or ought to know that drinking establishments like it have
historically been – and, in many cases, continue to be – places of harassment and
assault, especially of female patrons.

12. Despite this knowledge, Three Brits Pub has failed to take adequate steps to
prevent the over-consumption of alcohol that can expose female patrons to the
risk of sexual assault. Instead, it promotes over-alcohol consumption and
condones or is wilfully blind to the risk of sexual misconduct stemming from that
over-consumption and from the environment in the bar.
 -5-

13. Three Brits Pub does not provide staff with adequate training and guidelines
regarding safe alcohol consumption or prevention of sexual violence in bars. It
falls short of both the industry standard and its legal obligations, leaving its female
patrons vulnerable to harm.

14. Instead of taking adequate steps to ensure a safe environment for its female
guests, the leadership of Three Brits Ltd. perpetuates this harmful culture by
allowing and often encouraging heavy drinking to the point of extreme
intoxication, facilitating and encouraging heavy drinking between on-duty staff,
off-duty staff and restaurant staff from nearby establishments, and making jokes
and public statements about and promoting sexual harassment and sexual
assault.

Events Giving Rise to the Assault

Mr. Hennessey Had Previously Made Inappropriate Comments to Ms. Sandhu

15. Prior to the assault, Ms. Sandhu and Mr. Hennessey were social acquaintances.
At Three Brits Pub, Mr. Hennessey had previously provided Ms. Sandhu with free
drinks, including free shots, while he was working as bar manager.

16. Prior to the assault, Mr. Hennessey had also made inappropriate comments to
Ms. Sandhu about intoxication and female genitalia, among other comments.

Ms. Sandhu Was Over-Served Alcohol at the Three Brits Pub

17. On June 30, 2015, Ms. Sandhu attended a work event at the Cactus Club Café.

18. At or about 6 pm, Ms. Sandhu left the Cactus Club Café and went to the Three
Brits Pub, located nearby. At that time, Cactus Club Café employees frequently
went to the Three Brits Pub to socialize after work. Similarly, employees of the
Three Brits Pub frequented Cactus Club Café. Many staff members in the two
establishments knew each other, and it was not uncommon for them to spend
time together or to provide each other with complimentary food or drinks.

19. When Ms. Sandhu arrived at the Three Brits Pub, she sat by herself at the bar.
She was greeted by Mr. Murphy, the pub’s general manager, who was working
that evening, Mr. Murphy provided her with a free shot of Jameson whisky.

20. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Hennessy arrived at the pub through the back employee
entrance. Although he was an employee of the Three Brits Pub, he was not
working that evening.

21. Mr. Hennessey sat with Ms. Sandhu at the bar, and they engaged in conversation.
Over the course of that conversation, they exchanged numbers, immediately
following which Mr. Hennessey sent Ms. Sandhu an unsolicited text message
containing an image of Mr. Hennessey’s genitals.
 -6-

22. Throughout the course of their time sitting together, Ms. Sandhu was provided
with a number of alcoholic beverages by a second bartender, Taylor Smith. Some
of those drinks were paid for and others were provided by Mr. Taylor on a
complimentary basis. Mr. Smith provided those drinks largely at Mr. Hennessey’s
direction.

23. At no point did Mr. Murphy, Mr. Taylor or any other staff take steps to ensure that
Ms. Sandhu was not overly intoxicated.

Mr. Hennessey Assaulted Ms. Sandhu

24. Later, Mr. Hennessey invited Ms. Sandhu to his apartment, which was located in
the same building as the Three Brits Pub.

25. Ms. Sandhu was overly intoxicated. By the time they reached his apartment, she
was nauseous and unwell. Mr. Hennessey suggested they have sex. She told Mr.
Hennessey that she was too intoxicated to have sex, and that she should leave.
He told her that she was making excuses.

26. Ms. Sandhu requested Mr. Hennessey’s assistance arranging for a taxi. He
declined. Mr. Hennessey tied her feet together. She told him she needed to vomit,
and he untied them.

27. Ms. Sandhu vomited and then laid down. She expressed the need to leave.

28. Mr. Hennessey told Ms. Sandhu that she could not leave until they engaged in
sexual activity. She told him she did not consent.

29. Mr. Hennessey sexually assaulted Ms. Sandhu. During the sexual assault, he
choked her.

30. After the sexual assault, Ms. Sandhu left Mr. Hennessey’s apartment. She went to
the bathroom in the Three Brits, where she vomited again. She then took a taxi
home.

Ms. Sandhu’s Life Changed After the Assault

31. Following the assault, Ms. Sandhu experienced intense physical pain, including
from internal bruising.

32. She also reported the sexual assault to the police. Mr. Hennessey and Three Brits
Pub refused to cooperate with the police.

33. Ms. Sandhu quit her employment after the sexual assault to avoid being near the
area where the sexual assault occurred.

34. Ms. Sandhu received counselling for the post-traumatic stress symptoms she
suffered and continues to suffer from the assault.
 -7-

35. Ms. Sandhu moved to Toronto in the spring of 2017 to minimize her persistent
post-traumatic stress symptoms.

36. As a result of the sexual assault, Ms. Sandhu experienced and continues to
experience, among other symptoms:

(a) physical injury;

(b) mental distress, anguish, and feelings of guilt and worthlessness;

(c) decreased energy;

(d) stress and anxiety;

(e) lasting psychological and emotional trauma;

(f) loss of enjoyment of life;

(g) difficulty sleeping and nightmares;

(h) depression; and,

(i) an impaired ability to trust people, and to form sexual relationships with
people.

37. Ms. Sandhu also experienced a range of other harms as a result of the assault,
including loss of wages and capacity to earn income, costs associated with
therapy and medical care, and costs associated with moving to Toronto.

Part 2: RELIEF SOUGHT

1. The Plaintiff Ms. Sandhu seeks from the defendants:

(a) An award for damages as follows:

(i) (a) general and aggravated damages;

(ii) (b) punitive damages;

(iii) (c) loss of past and future income;

(iv) (d) loss of earning capacity;

(v) (e) costs of care; and,

(vi) (f) special damages.

2. An order prohibiting the individual defendants Cameron Hennessy and the

defendant Samuel Murphy from having any contact with the plaintiff her.;
 -8-

3. Interest pursuant to the Court Order Interest Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 79.;

4. Equitable pre-judgment interest;

5. Costs of this herein action; and,

6. Such further and other relief as the Honourable Court may deem just to award.

Part 3: LEGAL BASIS

1. The Plaintiff relies upon the common law torts of assault and battery.

2. The Plaintiff pleads and relies upon the Negligence Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 333
and the common law of negligence.

3. The Plaintiff pleads and relies upon the Occupiers Liability Act, R.S.B.C. 1996
c.337 and the common law of negligence.

4. The Plaintiff pleads and relies upon the Employment Standards Act, R.S.B.C.
1996 c.113 and the common law of constructive dismissal.

5. The Plaintiff relies on the common law of damages.

6. The Plaintiff is entitled to general damages to compensate her for the loss of
function and the loss of enjoyment of life suffered due to injuries sustained as a
result of each of the Defendants' conduct.

7. The factors giving rise to aggravated or punitive damages include the lack of
remorse or any remedial steps that could have been offered by the Defendants.

8. The Plaintiff is entitled to damages as a result of her loss of income and a

diminishment in her capacity to earn income, or for a loss of income earnings in
the future, due to the injuries she sustained as a result of the conduct of the
Defendants.

9. The Plaintiff is entitled to special damages to compensate her expenses incurred

and that she continues to incur as a result of her injuries resulting from the
conduct of each of the Defendants, such as loss and expense as a result of
treatment, medication and travelling expenses, particulars of which will be
delivered up to the date of trial, upon request.

10. The Plaintiff pleads and relies upon the Court Order Interest Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.
79.

Liability of Mr. Hennessey

 -9-

1. Mr. Hennessey committed the torts of sexual assault and battery, assault and
battery, and conspiracy. In the alternative, Mr. Hennessey committed the tort of
intentional infliction of mental suffering.

2. Mr. Hennessey’s conduct was flagrant and outrageous. It was intentional and was
carried out with the knowledge that it would cause Ms. Sandhu physical, mental
and emotional distress, injury and illness, including depression. Further, Mr.
Hennessey acted with reckless disregard for the consequences suffered by Ms.
Sandhu as a result of his actions.

3. Mr. Hennessey also acted in concert, by agreement or with a common design or

intention, with Mr. Taylor. Mr. Hennessey and Mr. Taylor engaged in unlawful
conduct, including the torts identified herein and breach of s. 61 of the Liquor
Control and Licensing Act, S.B.C. 2015, c. 19. That conduct was directed towards
Ms. Sandhu for the predominant purpose of causing injury. In the alternative, Mr.
Hennessey should have known that injury was likely to result.

4. Ms. Sandhu suffered extreme emotional distress and illness as a direct result of
Mr. Hennessey’s conduct.

Liability of Mr. Murphy

5. Mr. Murphy committed the tort of negligence.

6. He owed Ms. Sandhu a duty of care, and breached that duty by:

(a) Failing to ensure that Ms. Sandhu was not over-served with alcohol by his
bar staff; and,

(b) Failing to take other steps to ensure the safety of Ms. Sandhu.

7. Ms. Sandhu’s eventual assault and the resulting damages were the reasonably
and directly foreseeable outcome of that negligence.

Liability of Three Brits Ltd.

8. The Three Brits Ltd. committed the tort of negligence.

9. It owed Ms. Sandhu a duty of care in its capacity as a commercial host or, in the
alternative, a social host or otherwise.

10. The Three Brits Ltd. breached that duty of care and acted negligently through its
failure to:

(a) Ensure that Ms. Sandhu was not over-served;

(b) Ensure that Mr. Hennessy was not over-served;

 - 10 -

(c) Implement adequate supervision, monitoring and training policies and/or

systems regarding the service of alcohol and alcohol consumption;

(d) Implement adequate supervision, monitoring and training policies and/ or

systems regarding the prevention of sexual assault;

(e) Implement or follow any guidelines or policy for the appropriate response to
the report of a sexual assault;

(f) Provide available evidence during a police investigation; and,

(g) Take appropriate or reasonable steps to restore and ensure ongoing

personal safety and security at the Three Brits Pub.

11. Ms. Sandhu’s eventual assault and the resulting damages were the reasonably
and directly foreseeable outcome of that negligence.

12. The Three Brits Ltd. is also vicariously liable for the tortious conduct of Mr.
Murphy, Mr. Hennessey and its other bar staff.

Damages

13. Further to paragraphs 31 to 37, Ms. Sandhu suffered extensive damages as a

result of the events described above.

14. Ms. Sandhu is entitled to general damages to compensate her for the loss of
function and the loss of enjoyment of life suffered due to the injuries that she
sustained as a result of the defendants’ conduct.

15. She is entitled to damages as a result of her loss of income and a diminishment in
her capacity to earn income, or for a loss of income earnings in the future, due to
the injuries she sustained as a result of the conduct of the defendants.

16. Ms. Sandhu is also entitled to aggravated damages, due to the severity of the
conduct and the lack of remorse of the defendants.

17. She is entitled to special damages to compensate her expenses incurred and that
she continues to incur as a result of her injuries resulting from the conduct of each
of the defendants, such as loss and expense as a result of treatment, medication
and travelling expenses.

18. In support of her claim, Ms. Sandhu also pleads and relies on:

(a) the Negligence Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 333;

(b) the Occupiers Liability Act, R.S.B.C. 1996 c.337;

(c) the Liquor Control and Licensing Act, S.B.C. 2015, c. 19

 - 12 -

(1) Unless all parties of record consent or the court otherwise orders, each party of
record to an action must, within 35 days after the end of the pleading period,

(a) prepare a List of Documents in Form 22 that lists

(i) all documents that are or have been in the party’s possession or
control and that could, if available, be used by any party at trial to
prove or disprove a material fact, and

(ii) all other documents to which the party intends to refer at trial, and

(b) serve the list on all parties of record.