R. v. Patry

R. v. Patry

The defence failed to demonstrate a reasonable basis under the Vukelich threshold to justify a Jarvis voir dire because the allegations that the Henry audit was a ruse are speculative and unsupported by disclosure, and material witness statements affirm the Henrys were the proper subjects; therefore the court refused to order the Jarvis voir dire while leaving open the possibility of revisiting the issue if credible new evidence emerges at trial.

Citation
2018 BCSC 591
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Raymond Patry; Accused: Tara Patry
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal (tax Offences) / Pre Trial Vukelich Hearing to Determine Whether to Order a Jarvis Voir Dire
Outcome
Vukelich application dismissed; Jarvis voir dire not ordered
Legal Topics
Charter S.7, Charter S.24(2), Jarvis Application, Vukelich Hearing, Income Tax Act, Excise Tax Act, Production Orders S.487.012
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Tax Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Charter S.7 Charter S.24(2) Jarvis Application Vukelich Hearing +3 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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Raymond Patry

Accused

Tara Patry

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (tax Offences) / Pre Trial Vukelich Hearing to Determine Whether to Order a Jarvis Voir Dire

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Vukelich threshold is met to justify a Jarvis voir dire
  2. 2 Whether the Henry audit was a legitimate audit or a pretextual investigation targeting the Patrys
  3. 3 Whether evidence obtained during the Henry audit must be excluded under s.7 and s.24(2) of the Charter

Ratio Decidendi

The defence failed to demonstrate a reasonable basis under the Vukelich threshold to justify a Jarvis voir dire because the allegations that the Henry audit was a ruse are speculative and unsupported by disclosure, and material witness statements affirm the Henrys were the proper subjects; therefore the court refused to order the Jarvis voir dire while leaving open the possibility of revisiting the issue if credible new evidence emerges at trial.

Court Disposition

Vukelich application dismissed; Jarvis voir dire not ordered

Orders

  • Vukelich application dismissed
  • Jarvis voir dire refused at this time