R. v. Boudreau

R. v. Boudreau

Counts 2 and 3 must be dismissed because there was no evidence the accused contravened the specific regulatory offence charged (AFR s.14(1)(b)); although he was not designated under the ACFLR, that unpled regulatory breach is not the offence alleged and the information must be met as pleaded, so directed verdicts of acquittal were entered.

Citation
2009 NSPC 45
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Defendant: Gordon Andrew Boudreau
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial — Motion for Directed Verdict After Crown's Case
Outcome
Acquitted on counts 1, 2 and 3 (count 1 acquittal conceded by Crown; counts 2 and 3 acquitted by directed verdict)
Legal Topics
Authorization to Fish, Regulatory Compliance, Directed Verdict, Fair Notice, Statutory Interpretation
Source Language
English
Fisheries Law Criminal Law Aboriginal Law Administrative Law Authorization to Fish Regulatory Compliance Directed Verdict Fair Notice +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Gordon Andrew Boudreau

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial — Motion for Directed Verdict After Crown's Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was evidence to support conviction for fishing without authorization under Atlantic Fishery Regulations s.14(1)(b)
  2. 2 Whether designation under the Aboriginal Communal Fishing Licences Regulations was required to authorize fishing
  3. 3 Whether possession of fish was caught in contravention of s.14(1)(b)

Ratio Decidendi

Counts 2 and 3 must be dismissed because there was no evidence the accused contravened the specific regulatory offence charged (AFR s.14(1)(b)); although he was not designated under the ACFLR, that unpled regulatory breach is not the offence alleged and the information must be met as pleaded, so directed verdicts of acquittal were entered.

Court Disposition

Acquitted on counts 1, 2 and 3 (count 1 acquittal conceded by Crown; counts 2 and 3 acquitted by directed verdict)

Orders

  • Directed verdicts of acquittal on counts 2 and 3 of the Information sworn September 10, 2007
  • Count 1 acquitted by Court following Crown concession