R. v. Campbell

R. v. Campbell

Sections 3(1)(a) and 3.1 of the Open Burning Smoke Control Regulation regulate open burning that is otherwise permitted under the Waste Management Act and therefore do not require the Crown to prove the burn occurred on a defined "parcel of land" as an element; an acquittal under s.3(3) WMA means the burn is presumed permitted and location as a parcel is not essential to conviction under those regulatory provisions.

Citation
2008 BCSC 134
Parties
Respondent/crown: Regina; Appellant/accused: Harold Scott Campbell
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Provincial Court Conviction and Sentence to Supreme Court of British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentence upheld
Legal Topics
Open Burning Smoke Control Regulation, Waste Management Act, Prescribed Activity, Definition of "parcel of Land", Elements of Offence, Prohibited Material, Distance Requirements
Source Language
English
Environmental Law Regulatory Offences Criminal Law Statutory Interpretation Open Burning Smoke Control Regulation Waste Management Act Prescribed Activity Definition of "parcel of Land" +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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent/crown

Harold Scott Campbell

Appellant/accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Provincial Court Conviction and Sentence to Supreme Court of British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether "parcel of land" as defined in the OBSCR is an essential element that the Crown must prove for offences under ss. 3(1)(a) and 3.1 of the OBSCR
  2. 2 Whether a previous acquittal under s. 3(3) of the Waste Management Act affects the need to prove location for regulatory offences
  3. 3 Proper statutory interpretation of OBSCR in context of WMA and whether the Regulations regulate only permitted activity

Ratio Decidendi

Sections 3(1)(a) and 3.1 of the Open Burning Smoke Control Regulation regulate open burning that is otherwise permitted under the Waste Management Act and therefore do not require the Crown to prove the burn occurred on a defined "parcel of land" as an element; an acquittal under s.3(3) WMA means the burn is presumed permitted and location as a parcel is not essential to conviction under those regulatory provisions.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentence upheld

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction dismissed
  • Appeal against sentence dismissed