R. v. Vanden Elsen

Parties

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Preliminary Inquiry (judge's Opening Remarks; Partial Transcript)

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether an accused's consent to committal under s.549 prevents the Crown from withholding consent and leading further evidence to seek additional committals arising from the same transaction
2. 2 Whether the Crown must specify new charges under s.581 or present a new Information/Indictment prior to a Preliminary Inquiry if it intends to pursue additional charges
3. 3 The extent of the court's power under s.537(1)(i) and the mandatory duty under s.537(1.1) to regulate or cease abusive, repetitive or inappropriate examinations

Ratio Decidendi

When an accused consents to committal under s.549, the Preliminary Inquiry process must give effect to that consent by limiting the Crown's ability to withhold consent and use the Inquiry primarily to obtain committals on additional charges unless the Crown had given prior notice of those charges (e.g. under s.581) or presented a new Information/Indictment; the court, under s.537(1)(i) and s.537(1.1), has authority to regulate or curtail further evidence and must prevent abusive, repetitive or inappropriate examination, so any further Crown evidence must be material and non-abusive.

Court Disposition

Court held that accuseds' consent to committal substantially limits the Crown's ability to call additional evidence to obtain further committals absent prior specification of new charges; the court may and must control the Inquiry under s.537(1)(i) and cease abusive or repetitive examination under s.537(1.1).

Orders

• Any further Crown evidence at the Preliminary Inquiry must be material and not abusive, repetitive or otherwise inappropriate pursuant to s.537(1.1).