In the early hours of August 4, 2015, gunfire erupted inside Muzik nightclub, a sprawling venue hosting an after-party for Toronto rapper Drake’s annual OVO Fest. The cause of what police called a “brazen, large-scale” attack remains unknown, but the results were tragic: three people were injured in the shooting, and two – 26-year old Ariela Navarro-Fenoy and 23-year old Duvel Hibbert – were killed.
In the immediate aftermath of the attack, questions arose around the adequacy of Muzik’s security. According to Global News, the Toronto Police stated that the club was operating “under its normal security protocol for this type of event,” which included 73 trained and provincially-licenced security guards on duty, 10 armed Toronto Police officers and two marked cruisers on site, and two staff paramedics. While the on-duty police were not inside the building, they were patrolling the immediate area and were on the scene at the time the shooting occurred.
Credit: SPBer/Wikimedia Commons.
“Our officers were present when the initial shots went off,” stated Toronto Police Deputy Chief Peter Sloly. “They were within metres of the initial shooting. They continued to follow up as more firearms were discharged in the immediate aftermath of the shooting.”
Seven months later, the issue of adequate security is once again being raised as the family of Duvel Hibbert is suing Muzik, along with the unknown assailants, for $2.5 million, claiming the club was negligent in providing ample security to protect its patrons.
Generally, claims stemming from a fight or assault at a nightclub are negligence cases. The Hibberts’ claim includes $1.5 million in general and special damages, in addition to $1 million in aggravated, punitive and exemplary damages. In order to win their claim, the family will have to prove that the nightclub was not only negligent, but also that its negligence caused Duvel’s death.
“Given the number of patrons and given the size of the nightclub, it is our position that the amount of security was inadequate,” said the Hibbert family’s lawyer, Michael Smitiuch, according to the Globe and Mail.
The lawsuit lists a variety of way in which the family believes Muzik failed to adequately protect its patrons, including not providing enough police or security staff, allowing too many guests inside the venue, and failing to keep out weapons.
Another key point in the case will be a failure to step up security after previous violent incidents at the club. In 2013, Naveed Shahnawaz was shot dead outside the venue after trying to break up a fight, and several patrons have brought lawsuits alleging abuse at the hands of bouncers and performers’ bodyguards.
While Shahnawaz’s case has not yet been settled, it has several similarities to the Hibbert’s. According to the Toronto Star:
“The statement of claim, filed on behalf of Shahnawaz’s estate, is seeking $5 million in damages and alleges Muzik sold or supplied liquor to Shahnawaz and his friends “when (he was) they were or appeared to be intoxicated” and did not provide adequate security in an adjacent parking lot which has a history of fights, vandalism and “patrons possessing firearms and other weapons.”
“Despite this knowledge, Muzik made a business decision to continue its practices unchanged, and placed its pursuit of profit over and above the need to preserve public safety,” the court document says.”
Whether Muzik takes action to guard itself against further negligence or liability claims remains to be seen, but the result of both the Hibbert and Shahnawaz lawsuits will likely impact management’s future decision making.
