R. v. Riad

R. v. Riad

The hard copy documents combined with evidence of the Ontario Drug Benefit computer system and the absence of corresponding prescriptions provided an ample basis for the jury to conclude the appellants deprived the plan of funds; any hearsay regarding the amount, even if inadmissible, was not prejudicial because the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
C40463
Parties
Appellant: Nagy Riad; Appellant: Mina Pharm Ltd.; Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Convictions (superior Court of Justice, Jury)
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraud/deprivation of Funds, Evidence Hearsay, Sufficiency of Evidence
Source Language
en
Criminal Law Fraud/deprivation of Funds Evidence Hearsay Sufficiency of Evidence

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nagy Riad

Appellant

Mina Pharm Ltd.

Appellant

Her Majesty the Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Convictions (superior Court of Justice, Jury)

  1. 1 Sufficiency of evidence to support conviction for depriving the Ontario Drug Benefit Program of funds
  2. 2 Admissibility and prejudicial effect of hearsay evidence on the amount of detriment
  3. 3 Whether detriment exceeded statutory or material threshold ($5,000)

Ratio Decidendi

The hard copy documents combined with evidence of the Ontario Drug Benefit computer system and the absence of corresponding prescriptions provided an ample basis for the jury to conclude the appellants deprived the plan of funds; any hearsay regarding the amount, even if inadmissible, was not prejudicial because the appellants conceded the detriment exceeded $5,000; therefore the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Convictions affirmed.