R. v. Chan

R. v. Chan

On the facts, which were indistinguishable from R. v. Flintroy, the court found that the VPD practice of delaying access to counsel until arrival at jail resulted in delays of approximately two hours and therefore breached the accuseds' s.10(b) rights because police failed to provide access to counsel without delay.

Citation
2020 BCSC 192
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Duke Yin Chan; Accused: Lawton Louis Ma
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal (s.10(b) Charter Application) / Voir Dire (right to Retain and Instruct Counsel)
Outcome
Held that the s.10(b) Charter rights of both accused were breached.
Legal Topics
Charter Section 10(b), Right to Retain and Instruct Counsel, Police Procedures for Access to Counsel, Remedies for Charter Breaches
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Charter Section 10(b) Right to Retain and Instruct Counsel Police Procedures for Access to Counsel Remedies for Charter Breaches

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Duke Yin Chan

Accused

Lawton Louis Ma

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (s.10(b) Charter Application) / Voir Dire (right to Retain and Instruct Counsel)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accuseds' s.10(b) Charter rights were breached by delay in access to counsel after arrest
  2. 2 Whether Vancouver Police Department practice of providing access to counsel only upon arrival at jail satisfied the obligation to provide access without delay

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts, which were indistinguishable from R. v. Flintroy, the court found that the VPD practice of delaying access to counsel until arrival at jail resulted in delays of approximately two hours and therefore breached the accuseds' s.10(b) rights because police failed to provide access to counsel without delay.

Court Disposition

Held that the s.10(b) Charter rights of both accused were breached.

Orders

  • Declared that the s.10(b) rights of Duke Yin Chan and Lawton Louis Ma were violated.
  • Remedy and effect of the breaches deferred to a subsequent hearing.