R. v. Papaioannou
The Court held that the issuance and service of a frivolous civil claim that constituted communication intended to harass breached the appellant's probation order, and that re‑laying the charge after a simple mistake was not an abuse of process; accordingly the convictions and sentence appeals were dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C32493
- Parties
- Respondent: Her Majesty the Queen; Appellant: Nicholas Papaioannou
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 13 June 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted but sentence appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Probation Breach, Harassment, Vexatious Proceedings, Abuse of Process, Service of Civil Proceedings
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
Nicholas Papaioannou
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether issuing and serving civil court proceedings can constitute a breach of a probation order
- 2 Whether re‑laying the charge amounted to an abuse of process
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that the issuance and service of a frivolous civil claim that constituted communication intended to harass breached the appellant's probation order, and that re‑laying the charge after a simple mistake was not an abuse of process; accordingly the convictions and sentence appeals were dismissed.
Court Disposition
Conviction appeal dismissed; leave to appeal sentence granted but sentence appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Conviction appeal dismissed.
- Leave to appeal the sentence granted; sentence appeal dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Papaioannou Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2000-06-13 Docket numbers C32493 Judges McMurtry, Roy; Goudge, Stephen Thomas; Borins, Stephen Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20000613 DOCKET: C32493 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) and NICHOLAS PAPAIOANNOU (Appellant) BEFORE: McMURTRY C.J.O., GOUDGE AND BORINS JJ.A. COUNSEL: Dragi Zekavica For the appellant Thomas Galligan For the respondent Crown HEARD: June 7, 2000 On appeal from the conviction by Pickett J. dated April 27, 1999 and on appeal from the sentence imposed by Pickett J. dated June 29, 1999. ENDORSEMENT [1] The appellant argues that issuing and serving civil court proceedings cannot constitute a breach of his probation order. Considering the substance of the statement of the claim and the background that preceded the issuance of it, we disagree. The proceedings in this case clearly constitute a communication with the complainants, were intended as such, and were intended to further harass them. The claim in question on its face is a frivolous and vexatious proceeding. Any protection to civil proceedings that may be offered by the Charter does not extend to a claim drafted in this way. The trial judge properly found the breach of the probation order. [2] Secondly, the appellant argues that the re-laying of the charge here constitutes an abuse of process. No authority is offered in support. In our view, the re-laying of the charge in the circumstances of the simple mistake as was done here was entirely appropriate. See R. v. McArthur (1995), 102 C.C.C. (3d) 84 (Sask. C.A.). [3] We would therefore dismiss the conviction appeal. [4] As to sentence we see no error and would grant leave, but dismiss the appeal. “R. McMurtry C.J.O." “S.T. Goudge J.A.” “S. Borins J.A.”