Re: Schumiatcher

Re: Schumiatcher

The application for habeas corpus was dismissed because the Registrar, under s.13 of The Securities Act (and s.41 of the Evidence Act if needed), had authority to examine witnesses under oath so counts one to seven disclose offences and the committal was proper; further, the Supreme Court's habeas corpus jurisdiction is limited to examining the warrant of committal on its face and cannot review or re‑weigh preliminary hearing evidence or decide the contested legal question about the validity of the solemn declarations on this remedy.

Citation
[1962] SCR 38
Parties
Petitioner/accused: Morris C. Shumiatcher; Respondent: Crown (Saskatchewan)
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 September 1961
Procedural Posture
Criminal (perjury; Counselling to Commit Perjury) / Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus After Committal for Trial; Preliminary Hearing and Indictment Preferred
Outcome
Application for writ of habeas corpus dismissed
Legal Topics
Habeas Corpus, Perjury, Solemn Declaration, Registrar Powers, Judicial Proceeding Definition, Scope of Habeas Corpus Review, Preliminary Hearing
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Administrative Law Procedural Law Habeas Corpus Perjury Solemn Declaration Registrar Powers +3 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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Morris C. Shumiatcher

Petitioner/accused

Crown (Saskatchewan)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal (perjury; Counselling to Commit Perjury) / Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus After Committal for Trial; Preliminary Hearing and Indictment Preferred

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an examination by the Registrar under s.13 of The Securities Act is a 'judicial proceeding' within s.112 of the Criminal Code so as to ground perjury charges
  2. 2 Whether the Registrar has statutory authority to examine under oath and to administer the oath
  3. 3 Whether the solemn declarations relied on fall within persons 'permitted, authorized or required by law' to make statements under s.114 of the Criminal Code

Ratio Decidendi

The application for habeas corpus was dismissed because the Registrar, under s.13 of The Securities Act (and s.41 of the Evidence Act if needed), had authority to examine witnesses under oath so counts one to seven disclose offences and the committal was proper; further, the Supreme Court's habeas corpus jurisdiction is limited to examining the warrant of committal on its face and cannot review or re‑weigh preliminary hearing evidence or decide the contested legal question about the validity of the solemn declarations on this remedy.

Court Disposition

Application for writ of habeas corpus dismissed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Bail continued pending October 10, 1961 to afford applicant opportunity to apply to full Court for bail