R. v. C.L.

R. v. C.L.

The Court held it was bound by its prior decision in R. v. N.F. that a school does not fall within the definition of "premises" in the Protection of Property Act; punctuation alone does not overturn the prior statutory interpretation, therefore the charge under s.3(1)(e) is a nullity and must be dismissed.

Citation
2005 NSFC 21
Parties
Prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: C.L.
Court
Nova Scotia Family Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Decision on Applicability of Precedent and Dismissal of Charge
Outcome
Charge declared a nullity and dismissed
Legal Topics
Protection of Property Act, Definition of Premises, Stare Decisis, Dismissal as Nullity
Source Language
English

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Prosecution

C.L.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Decision on Applicability of Precedent and Dismissal of Charge

  1. 1 Whether R. v. N.F., 2004 NSFC 3 is applicable to the charge against the accused
  2. 2 Whether a school falls within the statutory definition of "premises" under the Protection of Property Act s.2(d)
  3. 3 Whether the Court can revisit its own prior decision in a criminal matter

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held it was bound by its prior decision in R. v. N.F. that a school does not fall within the definition of "premises" in the Protection of Property Act; punctuation alone does not overturn the prior statutory interpretation, therefore the charge under s.3(1)(e) is a nullity and must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Charge declared a nullity and dismissed

Orders

  • Charge declared a nullity and dismissed