‘Dishonorable, unreasonable, and defamatory.’ Stewart sues Metro Vancouver over handling of data breach investigation

Coquitlam Mayor Richard Stewart filed a civil claim against Metro Vancouver on Friday, alleging he suffered loss of income and damage to his reputation during the fallout from a 2022 data breach.

Filed in B.C. Supreme Court, the suit describes a secretive Metro Vancouver investigation that focused on Stewart and incorrectly concluded he’d breached his oath of office.

Stewart was a director at Metro Vancouver when the regional government was getting ready to terminate Acciona engineering company’s contract to build the North Shore Wastewater Treatment Plant.

However, as Metro was preparing for possible litigation and advising its members of the importance of confidentiality, a confidential document that had been distributed to Metro’s board of directors ended up at Acciona.

The breach was allegedly caused by Coquitlam’s now retired city manager Peter Steblin, who used Stewart’s Metro ID and password to access the confidential report, according to an affidavit previously provided by Metro Vancouver commissioner Jerry W. Dobrovolny.

According to Norton Rose Fulbright – the law firm representing Metro Vancouver – Steblin left his laptop open and his daughter Anika Calder – who was also an Acciona employee – took cellphone pictures of the documents and sent the photos, directly or indirectly, to at least four people.

After more than three years, Metro filed a consent order in December 2025, officially ending the legal battle between the regional utility provider and multinational conglomerate Acciona.

After the breach

After finding out about the breach in June 2022, Stewart interviewed both Steblin and Calder and passed the information to Metro staff. He also met with a Metro Vancouver investigator and answered questions, according to the civil claim.

But while Stewart described his behaviour as responsible and forthright, he contended Metro Vancouver largely blamed him for the breach.

“Metro and members of its board and staff engaged in a course of conduct which was dishonorable, unreasonable, and defamatory,” according to the claim.

The claim contended Dobrovolny “knowingly misrepresented” a key fact by stating only directors had access to confidential Metro materials.

“[Dobrovolny] was well aware of the longstanding and instructed practice for directors to be briefed and otherwise assisted by their city staff,” the claim stated.

That misrepresentation resulted in Stewart being accused of playing a role in the breach, “when the CAO knew that was not true.”

Metro instructed its investigator to focus on Stewart. However, Dobrovolny led Stewart to believe his conduct wasn’t in question.

Stewart discovered he was the focus of the investigation in September 2022, when, without any advance notice, he arrived at a board meeting and found himself listed as the “respondent” in Metro’s investigation report.

Stewart declared a conflict of interest and recused himself from the meeting.

Approximately one month later, Stewart was instructed not to attend a Metro board meeting. At that meeting, the board passed a resolution that Coquitlam be requested not to appoint Stewart to any Metro boards in the future.

Following the 2022 municipal election, Stewart didn’t serve as a director on regional boards due to the request from Metro.

Metro’s investigation concluded Stewart had breached his oath of office by not knowing who was using his login credentials.

Stewart refuted that conclusion.

When asked, Stewart told Metro’s investigator that he didn’t know all the names of staffers who used his login. However, that response was based on his unaided recollection. If asked, or if he’d known he was the focus of the investigation, Stewart stated he “could and would have provided a list of names,” which would have consisted of a few senior employees and their executive assistants.

The investigation also found Stewart: “did not take reasonable steps to investigate the conduct of the Coquitlam CAO following learning of the incident.”

Stewart also rejected that assertion, stating he didn’t have authority to start a formal investigation but that he informed Coquitlam city council, interviewed relevant parties, and kept Metro staff abreast of the steps the city was taking.

“Metro raised no objection,” according to the claim.

Ultimately, Stewart contended Metro’s investigation report was defamatory and reached “erroneous conclusions,” stating or implying Stewart wasn’t of “suitable character or competence” to serve as a director with Metro.

Besides loss of income and reputation, the claim stated Stewart suffered physical and emotional distress.

None of the allegations have been proven in court.