Frey v. Fedoruk et al.

Frey v. Fedoruk et al.

Peeping into a private house under the facts did not constitute any criminal offence known to the law; therefore arrest without warrant was unjustified. Section 30 of the Criminal Code only protects a peace officer who, on reasonable and probable grounds, believes that facts exist which, if true, would constitute an offence for which arrest without warrant is permitted; it does not justify arrest where, as a matter of law, the facts do not amount to any offence. Conduct merely likely to provoke a breach of the peace is not automatically criminal.

Citation
[1950] SCR 517
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Bernard Frey; Respondent (defendant): Stephen Fedoruk; Respondent (defendant): Richard Percy Stone
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 April 1950
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for False Imprisonment (appeal Raising Criminal‑law Issues) / Supreme Court of Canada — Final Appeal From Court of Appeal for British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment for appellant on false imprisonment claim against both respondents.
Legal Topics
False Imprisonment, Breach of the Peace, Arrest Without Warrant, Common Law Offences, Onus of Proof, Peeping Tom
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Torts Civil Procedure False Imprisonment Breach of the Peace Arrest Without Warrant Common Law Offences Onus of Proof +1 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bernard Frey

Appellant (plaintiff)

Stephen Fedoruk

Respondent (defendant)

Richard Percy Stone

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for False Imprisonment (appeal Raising Criminal‑law Issues) / Supreme Court of Canada — Final Appeal From Court of Appeal for British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether peeping into a private dwelling at night constitutes a criminal offence at common law or under statute
  2. 2 Whether acts likely to cause a breach of the peace are per se criminal
  3. 3 Whether arrest without a warrant was justified under Criminal Code ss.30, 648 or 650

Ratio Decidendi

Peeping into a private house under the facts did not constitute any criminal offence known to the law; therefore arrest without warrant was unjustified. Section 30 of the Criminal Code only protects a peace officer who, on reasonable and probable grounds, believes that facts exist which, if true, would constitute an offence for which arrest without warrant is permitted; it does not justify arrest where, as a matter of law, the facts do not amount to any offence. Conduct merely likely to provoke a breach of the peace is not automatically criminal.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment for appellant on false imprisonment claim against both respondents.

Orders

  • Allow appeal and enter judgment for appellant against Stephen Fedoruk for $10
  • Enter judgment for appellant against Richard Percy Stone for $50