R. v. Chartrand

R. v. Chartrand

The application for leave to proceed to a voir dire was denied because the applicant failed to supply an adequate evidentiary foundation and qualified expert evidence necessary to show a reasonable likelihood of proving a s.7 Charter infringement; the proposed experts could not be qualified on the materials filed; the issues raised had been addressed and rejected in other courts; and the Provincial Court judge properly exercised discretion under Vukelich/Pires jurisprudence to summarily dismiss the application to protect finite judicial resources.

Citation
2020 NSPC 26
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Heidi Chartrand
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal (pre Trial Constitutional Challenge Under the Constitutional Questions Act) / Pre Trial Motion: Application for Leave to Proceed to Voir Dire on Constitutional Questions; Crown Application to Summarily Dismiss; Decision Denying Leave
Outcome
Application for leave to proceed to a voir dire on the constitutional questions denied; Crown application to summarily dismiss granted
Legal Topics
Section 7 Charter (life, Liberty, Security), Constitutional Questions Act Notice Requirement, Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations (acmpr), Leave for Voir Dire, Expert Evidence Admissibility, Vukelich/pires Summary Dismissal Principle
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Health Regulation Evidence Law Section 7 Charter (life, Liberty, Security) Constitutional Questions Act Notice Requirement Controlled Drugs and Substances Act +4 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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Heidi Chartrand

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (pre Trial Constitutional Challenge Under the Constitutional Questions Act) / Pre Trial Motion: Application for Leave to Proceed to Voir Dire on Constitutional Questions; Crown Application to Summarily Dismiss; Decision Denying Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to conduct a voir dire challenging the constitutionality of the CDSA and the ACMPR under s.7 of the Charter
  2. 2 Whether the Provincial Court may grant the remedies sought (s.24 v. s.52)
  3. 3 Whether the evidentiary foundation and proposed expert evidence are sufficient to establish a reasonable likelihood of proving a s.7 breach

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to proceed to a voir dire was denied because the applicant failed to supply an adequate evidentiary foundation and qualified expert evidence necessary to show a reasonable likelihood of proving a s.7 Charter infringement; the proposed experts could not be qualified on the materials filed; the issues raised had been addressed and rejected in other courts; and the Provincial Court judge properly exercised discretion under Vukelich/Pires jurisprudence to summarily dismiss the application to protect finite judicial resources.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to proceed to a voir dire on the constitutional questions denied; Crown application to summarily dismiss granted

Orders

  • Leave to proceed to a voir dire on the Constitutional Questions denied
  • Crown's application to summarily dismiss the constitutional application granted