R. v. Basi

R. v. Basi

The application to hear the abuse of process and s.7/24 Charter challenge before trial is premature; a full evidentiary foundation including Bornmann's testimony and any corroborating Crown evidence is required to assess credibility, actual prejudice and appropriate remedy, therefore the application should be brought at the close of the Crown's case (leave granted).

Citation
2009 BCSC 1685
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Udhe Singh (Dave) Basi; Accused: Bobby Singh Virk; Accused: Aneal Basi
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal (charges of Corruption, Fraud, Breach of Trust) / Pre Trial — Timing Application on Abuse of Process; Ruling on When Application Must Be Heard (leave Granted to Bring at Close of Crown's Case)
Outcome
Application to hear abuse of process/Charter s.7 application before trial denied as premature; defence granted leave to bring the application at the close of the Crown's case.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Charter S.7, Charter S.24, Immunity Agreements, Admissibility Vs Weight, Stay of Proceedings, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Timing of Interlocutory Applications
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Procedural Law Administrative Law Abuse of Process Charter S.7 Charter S.24 +5 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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Udhe Singh (Dave) Basi

Accused

Bobby Singh Virk

Accused

Aneal Basi

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (charges of Corruption, Fraud, Breach of Trust) / Pre Trial — Timing Application on Abuse of Process; Ruling on When Application Must Be Heard (leave Granted to Bring at Close of Crown's Case)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused's abuse of process/Charter s.7 application should be heard before trial or at the close of the Crown's case
  2. 2 Whether the Crown's immunity agreement with a key witness (Erik Bornmann) amounts to an abuse of process or a s.7 breach warranting a stay or exclusion of evidence
  3. 3 Whether factual foundation (witness testimony and corroborating evidence) is required before resolving the Charter and remedy issues

Ratio Decidendi

The application to hear the abuse of process and s.7/24 Charter challenge before trial is premature; a full evidentiary foundation including Bornmann's testimony and any corroborating Crown evidence is required to assess credibility, actual prejudice and appropriate remedy, therefore the application should be brought at the close of the Crown's case (leave granted).

Court Disposition

Application to hear abuse of process/Charter s.7 application before trial denied as premature; defence granted leave to bring the application at the close of the Crown's case.

Orders

  • Declined to hear the abuse of process application before trial
  • Defence granted leave to bring the abuse of process/Charter application at the close of the Crown's case