<div>
 When a member of the Canadian Armed Forces signs on the dotted line, they do so under a sacred covenant: An oath of unlimited liability to serve their country, with the explicit promise that if something happens to them, Canada will protect them and their dependents.
</div>
<div>
 Today, the Government of Canada is using taxpayer dollars to argue in Federal Court that this promise does not exist.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 In <strong>Butt v. Canada 2024 FC 983</strong>, federal lawyers are arguing that the Crown owes no fiduciary duty of care to military families to ensure survivor benefits and binding family support court orders reach the rightful children of a deceased veteran. In their court filings, they have gone so far as to label our fight for basic accountability as "frivolous, vexatious, and scandalous."
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 <strong>A DANGEROUS PATTERN: WHY THIS CASE IS THE NEW BATTLEGROUND</strong>
</div>
<div>
 In 2013, during the landmark Equitas case (Scott v. Canada), federal lawyers shocked the nation by arguing in court that the Government of Canada owed "no sacred obligation" or fiduciary duty to injured veterans.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 While a B.C. Superior Court judge initially rejected the government's attempt to throw out the lawsuit, the Crown fought the decision all the way to the B.C. Court of Appeal, which ultimately ruled in late 2017 that political promises of a "social covenant" were not legally binding private law obligations. In 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the final appeal—leaving veterans with a dangerous precedent: court enforcement alone cannot protect service members if the government denies owing a duty of care.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 At the time, veteran advocates warned that if government lawyers could successfully dismantle the duty of care owed to wounded soldiers, military families and surviving dependents would be next.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 That prediction has come true.
</div>
<div>
 Today, in Butt v. Canada, the federal government is using that exact same playbook against a deceased veteran’s family. They are arguing in Federal Court that the Crown owes no fiduciary duty of care to military families to ensure survivor benefits reach rightful dependents or that binding family support court judgments under federal law (GAPDA) are honored.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 Because the courts previously ruled that an unwritten "social covenant" does not automatically protect veterans under common law, our lawsuit is fighting to establish explicit, binding accountability for operational negligence. If we do not force a legal precedent and legislative reform now, the Crown's "no duty of care" argument will become an unassailable shield used against every military family in Canada.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
 <strong>WHY WE NEED YOUR HELP: $170,000+ AND COUNTING</strong>
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 Over the past 5 years since his death, our surviving Veteran family have exhausted every administrative channel. We took our evidence to the police, police oversight, and ombudsmens—only to watch every oversight mechanism defer, deflect, or close its doors without investigating.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 To date, we have spent over $170,000 in legal expenses just trying to force government departments to obey standing court judgments and honor statutory survivor entitlements.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 We are nowhere near the finish line.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 The government's litigation strategy relies on endless delays, deep taxpayer funded pockets, and procedural motions designed to financially drain a family until they give up. They want us to walk away in silence so no court ever holds them accountable.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 <strong>SETTING A NATIONAL PRECEDENT</strong>
</div>
<div>
 We refuse to let them bury this file.
</div>
<div>
 This lawsuit is no longer just about our Veteran family —it is about establishing a binding national legal precedent for every military family in Canada. If the Crown successfully establishes that it owes "no duty of care" to the children of deceased service members, no military family is safe from administrative negligence.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 We are raising funds to take Butt v. Canada through Federal Court discoveries and trial. Every dollar raised goes directly toward the legal costs required to keep our legal team at Wagner Sidlofsky on the front lines.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 <strong>THE DOTTED LINE IS NOT A ONE-WAY STREET</strong>
</div>
<div>
 Our service members do not give half a commitment when they sign on the dotted line. The government cannot be allowed to claim a "one-way street" when it comes time to support their surviving children.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 How You Can Help:
</div>
<div>
 Donate: Any contribution—big or small—helps keep our legal fight alive in Federal Court.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 Share: Spread this campaign across veteran networks, military base communities, and social media.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 Stand With Us: Send a message to Ottawa that Canadian veterans and their families deserve protection, honor, and a true duty of care.
</div>
<div>
 <br>
</div>
<div>
 Thank you for standing with us in this fight for justice and institutional accountability.
</div>

Lina Moreau

Scott greenland

Beyond the Dotted Line: Duty of Care for Military Families

Still $2,020 to go. Help us build momentum.