Perry v. Perry

Perry v. Perry

The application was refused on the existing filed materials as insufficient; however, the court held that if the applicants file affidavit materials confirming the oral assertions (including documentation indicating proprietorship and related materials), the order to examine the detained things should be granted within the parameters of the applicable Rule.

Citation
2000 BCSC 663
Parties
Plaintiff: Christopher D. Perry; Plaintiff: Janet L. Perry; Defendant: Irene Perry; Defendant: Gordon Perry; Defendant: Jacqueline Davis; Defendant: Steve Davis; Defendant: Ministry of Social Development and Economic Resources; Defendant: Ministry of Attorney General
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 April 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal (s.490(15) Application) / In Chambers; Pre Trial Application Heard April 14, 2000
Outcome
Application refused on the present filed materials; conditional grant indicated if proper affidavit and documentation are filed.
Legal Topics
Section 490(15) Criminal Code, Examination of Detained Things, Disclosure, Witness Material
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Procedural Law Section 490(15) Criminal Code Examination of Detained Things Disclosure Witness Material

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher D. Perry

Plaintiff

Janet L. Perry

Plaintiff

Irene Perry

Defendant

Gordon Perry

Defendant

Jacqueline Davis

Defendant

Steve Davis

Defendant

Ministry of Social Development and Economic Resources

Defendant

Ministry of Attorney General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal (s.490(15) Application) / In Chambers; Pre Trial Application Heard April 14, 2000

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants should be permitted to examine things detained under s.490(15) of the Criminal Code
  2. 2 Whether the filed materials were sufficient to support the order
  3. 3 What affidavit/evidentiary materials are required to obtain such an order

Ratio Decidendi

The application was refused on the existing filed materials as insufficient; however, the court held that if the applicants file affidavit materials confirming the oral assertions (including documentation indicating proprietorship and related materials), the order to examine the detained things should be granted within the parameters of the applicable Rule.

Court Disposition

Application refused on the present filed materials; conditional grant indicated if proper affidavit and documentation are filed.

Orders

  • Application denied on current materials as insufficient
  • If applicants file affidavit materials confirming oral statements and produce documentation showing proprietorship and related materials, the court will grant the order to examine the detained things within the parameters of the Rule