R. v. De La Boursodiere

R. v. De La Boursodiere

The Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knowingly prepared and submitted invoices and claims that misrepresented that licensed practitioners provided treatments and that she forged and submitted an assignment of benefits in J.K.'s name; PBC was deprived of $170.30 on the L. claim and the accused...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2012 BCSC 1783
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Teresa Kathleen De La Boursodiere
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Fraud and Forgery / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons and Verdict)
Outcome
Convictions entered on fraud and forgery related counts and on attempted fraud as charged
Legal Topics
Fraud, Forgery, Attempt, Use of Forged Document, Actus Reus, Mens Rea
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Insurance Law Fraud Forgery Attempt Use of Forged Document Actus Reus Mens Rea

Source-derived case record

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Teresa Kathleen De La Boursodiere

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Fraud and Forgery / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons and Verdict)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether invoices and claim information were false
  2. 2 Whether accused provided the false information to PBC
  3. 3 Whether PBC was deprived or at risk of deprivation

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knowingly prepared and submitted invoices and claims that misrepresented that licensed practitioners provided treatments and that she forged and submitted an assignment of benefits in J.K.'s name; PBC was deprived of $170.30 on the L. claim and the accused is guilty of fraud (Count 1), guilty of using a forged document (Count 2), guilty of forgery (Count 3), and guilty of attempted fraud as to the D. family claims (Count 4).

Court Disposition

Convictions entered on fraud and forgery related counts and on attempted fraud as charged

Orders

  • Count 1: Guilty of fraud under s.380(1)(b) of the Criminal Code (deprivation proved $170.30)
  • Count 2: Guilty of using a forged document contrary to s.368(1)(a) of the Criminal Code