R. v. Beavies

R. v. Beavies

The judge found on the evidence that the applicant was the registered legal owner, that Beavies never had legal title or transferred title to her to avoid forfeiture, that she was neither charged nor convicted, and that she took all reasonable care; the Crown failed to prove she was a nominal owner or that the vehicle was used in the offences, therefore s.20 relief was warranted and the vehicle must be returned to her.

Citation
2004 NSPC 36
Parties
Applicant/registered Owner: Michelle Jollimore; Convicted Person/forfeiture Subject: Carl Beavies; Respondent/crown: Regina (Crown)
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Controlled Drugs and Substances Act S.20 Application for Return of Forfeited Property / Decision on Application/hearing Concluded
Outcome
Application granted; applicant declared 100% owner and interest not affected by forfeiture; vehicle ordered returned.
Legal Topics
Forfeiture, Offence Related Property, Innocent Owner, Reasonable Care, Nominal Owner
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Forfeiture Property Law Statutory Interpretation Offence Related Property Innocent Owner Reasonable Care Nominal Owner

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michelle Jollimore

Applicant/registered Owner

Carl Beavies

Convicted Person/forfeiture Subject

Regina (Crown)

Respondent/crown

Procedural Posture

Controlled Drugs and Substances Act S.20 Application for Return of Forfeited Property / Decision on Application/hearing Concluded

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether police observations of Beavies driving the vehicle establish exclusive control rendering applicant a nominal owner under s.20(1)(c)
  2. 2 Whether the applicant exercised all reasonable care to be satisfied the vehicle was not likely to be used in connection with an unlawful act by the person permitted to use it

Ratio Decidendi

The judge found on the evidence that the applicant was the registered legal owner, that Beavies never had legal title or transferred title to her to avoid forfeiture, that she was neither charged nor convicted, and that she took all reasonable care; the Crown failed to prove she was a nominal owner or that the vehicle was used in the offences, therefore s.20 relief was warranted and the vehicle must be returned to her.

Court Disposition

Application granted; applicant declared 100% owner and interest not affected by forfeiture; vehicle ordered returned.

Orders

  • Declare applicant Michelle Jollimore has 100 percent ownership interest and title in the vehicle and that her interest is not affected by the forfeiture pursuant to Controlled Drugs and Substances Act s.20(4)
  • Order that the vehicle be returned to the applicant pursuant to Controlled Drugs and Substances Act s.20(6)