Festing v. Canada (Attorney General)

Festing v. Canada (Attorney General)

Majority (Prowse J.A.) held s.488.1 infringes s.8 of the Charter and is not justified under s.1; because s.488.1 is fundamentally deficient it is declared of no force and effect (suspended pending SCC decision). The Court further held s.487, insofar as it authorizes searches of law offices without mandatory, specific safeguards for solicitor-client privilege, breaches s.8 and should be read down by adding "other than a law office" to s.487(1) (suspension pending SCC decision).

Citation
2001 BCCA 612
Parties
Applicant: Mark Festing; Ashleigh Festing; B.W.I. Management Ltd.; Cejay Equities Ltd.; Phase Construction Ltd.; M.P.H. Holdings Ltd.; O.S. Construction Services Ltd.; Phase Construction (W.V.) Ltd.; Phase Construction (N.S.) Ltd.; 475338 British Columbia Ltd.; Marash Holdings Ltd.; Ashmar Developments Ltd.; Ashmar Leasing Ltd.; Phase Realty Inc.; The Keystone Trust; Rockwell Management Ltd.; Phase Construction (R.M.) Ltd.; Stone Haven Developments Ltd.; Respondent: Steven O. Youngman; Respondent: Paul Gaster; Appellant/respondent: Eric Emerson Huber; Appellant: Attorney General of Canada; Intervenor: Law Society of British Columbia; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 November 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Code/charter Challenge Re Search Warrants and Solicitor Client Privilege / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeals and Cross Appeals (suspended Pending SCC Review)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Search and Seizure, Solicitor Client Privilege, Search Warrants, Section 487 Criminal Code, Section 488.1 Criminal Code, Charter S.8, Charter S.7, Oakes S.1 Analysis, Remedies (reading Down/reading In/severance)
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Evidence Law Professional Responsibility Search and Seizure Solicitor Client Privilege Search Warrants Section 487 Criminal Code +5 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark Festing; Ashleigh Festing; B.W.I. Management Ltd.; Cejay Equities Ltd.; Phase Construction Ltd.; M.P.H. Holdings Ltd.; O.S. Construction Services Ltd.; Phase Construction (W.V.) Ltd.; Phase Construction (N.S.) Ltd.; 475338 British Columbia Ltd.; Marash Holdings Ltd.; Ashmar Developments Ltd.; Ashmar Leasing Ltd.; Phase Realty Inc.; The Keystone Trust; Rockwell Management Ltd.; Phase Construction (R.M.) Ltd.; Stone Haven Developments Ltd.

Applicant

Steven O. Youngman

Respondent

Paul Gaster

Respondent

Eric Emerson Huber

Appellant/respondent

Attorney General of Canada

Appellant

Law Society of British Columbia

Intervenor

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Code/charter Challenge Re Search Warrants and Solicitor Client Privilege / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeals and Cross Appeals (suspended Pending SCC Review)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.488.1 of the Criminal Code breaches ss.7 and 8 of the Charter and is not saved under s.1
  2. 2 Whether courts should remedy any breach by reading down/reading in rather than striking down s.488.1
  3. 3 Whether s.487 of the Criminal Code breaches ss.7 or 8 in authorizing searches of law offices

Ratio Decidendi

Majority (Prowse J.A.) held s.488.1 infringes s.8 of the Charter and is not justified under s.1; because s.488.1 is fundamentally deficient it is declared of no force and effect (suspended pending SCC decision). The Court further held s.487, insofar as it authorizes searches of law offices without mandatory, specific safeguards for solicitor-client privilege, breaches s.8 and should be read down by adding "other than a law office" to s.487(1) (suspension pending SCC decision).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Declare s.488.1 of the Criminal Code of no force and effect (suspended pending decision of the Supreme Court of Canada)
  • Read into s.487(1) the words "other than a law office" so s.487 does not authorize warrants for law offices (suspension of implementation pending SCC decision)