R. v. Pilarinos

R. v. Pilarinos

Judge found beyond reasonable doubt that Pilarinos knowingly conferred benefits and concealed a partner to further his casino application and thus convicted him on counts under ss.121(1)(a),(e),(b),(d), s.341 and s.397(1)(b); but the Crown failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Premier Clark knowingly accepted an uncompensated benefit or committed breach of trust under s.122, and Carter test precluded admission of Pilarinos' co-conspirator statements as proof against Clark, resulting in Clark's acquittal on the breach and related counts.

Citation
2002 BCSC 1267
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Dimitrios Pilarinos; Accused: Glen David Clark
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 August 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Indictment (corruption/breach of Trust) / Trial Judgment (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Defendant Dimitrios Pilarinos: convicted on Counts 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8; acquitted on Counts 3, 4 and 9. Defendant Glen David Clark: acquitted on Counts 10 and 11.
Legal Topics
Breach of Trust, Fraud on the Government, Bribery and Corruption, Co Conspirator Hearsay (carter Test), Concealment/falsification of Documents, Conflict of Interest
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Public Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Breach of Trust Fraud on the Government Bribery and Corruption Co Conspirator Hearsay (carter Test) +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Dimitrios Pilarinos

Accused

Glen David Clark

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Indictment (corruption/breach of Trust) / Trial Judgment (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether gifts/renovations constituted a 'benefit' under s.121 Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether quid pro quo was required for s.121 offences
  3. 3 Admissibility of co-conspirator statements against Clark (Carter test)

Ratio Decidendi

Judge found beyond reasonable doubt that Pilarinos knowingly conferred benefits and concealed a partner to further his casino application and thus convicted him on counts under ss.121(1)(a),(e),(b),(d), s.341 and s.397(1)(b); but the Crown failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Premier Clark knowingly accepted an uncompensated benefit or committed breach of trust under s.122, and Carter test precluded admission of Pilarinos' co-conspirator statements as proof against Clark, resulting in Clark's acquittal on the breach and related counts.

Court Disposition

Defendant Dimitrios Pilarinos: convicted on Counts 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8; acquitted on Counts 3, 4 and 9. Defendant Glen David Clark: acquitted on Counts 10 and 11.

Orders

  • Dimitrios Pilarinos convicted on Counts 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8
  • Dimitrios Pilarinos acquitted on Counts 3, 4 and 9