R. v. Doucette

R. v. Doucette

Adopt the wider interpretive approach to "significantly modified" that includes both structural alterations and the extent to which the property was turned away from its legitimate use; on the evidence (extensive partitioning, ducting, illegal electrical system, ceiling, chimney penetration and 80% of the building engaged in a commercial grow), the property was significantly modified and therefore constituted offence-related property; accordingly Crown established prima facie entitlement to forfeiture but formal forfeiture was postponed to permit the Company to be heard under s.19(3).

Citation
2007 NSPC 19
Parties
Crown/prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Offender/defendant: Peter Victor Doucette; Owner/company: 3029062 Nova Scotia Limited
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Forfeiture Application Under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act / Post Conviction Forfeiture Hearing; Order Reserved Pending Potential S.19(3) Submissions
Outcome
Court finds property is offence-related and Crown has prima facie entitlement to forfeiture; issuance of formal forfeiture order postponed to allow Company to be heard under s.19(3).
Legal Topics
Offence Related Property, Meaning of "significantly Modified", Proportionality in Forfeiture, Restraining Order, S.16 and S.19 CDSA
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Forfeiture Property Law Statutory Interpretation of CDSA Offence Related Property Meaning of "significantly Modified" Proportionality in Forfeiture Restraining Order +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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown/prosecution

Peter Victor Doucette

Offender/defendant

3029062 Nova Scotia Limited

Owner/company

Procedural Posture

Criminal Forfeiture Application Under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act / Post Conviction Forfeiture Hearing; Order Reserved Pending Potential S.19(3) Submissions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the real property was "offence-related property" within the CDSA definition as of April 6, 2001
  2. 2 How to interpret "significantly modified" in relation to real property forfeiture
  3. 3 Whether forfeiture should be ordered or whether s.19(3) factors warrant refusal or mitigation

Ratio Decidendi

Adopt the wider interpretive approach to "significantly modified" that includes both structural alterations and the extent to which the property was turned away from its legitimate use; on the evidence (extensive partitioning, ducting, illegal electrical system, ceiling, chimney penetration and 80% of the building engaged in a commercial grow), the property was significantly modified and therefore constituted offence-related property; accordingly Crown established prima facie entitlement to forfeiture but formal forfeiture was postponed to permit the Company to be heard under s.19(3).

Court Disposition

Court finds property is offence-related and Crown has prima facie entitlement to forfeiture; issuance of formal forfeiture order postponed to allow Company to be heard under s.19(3).

Orders

  • Forfeiture order to be drafted by Crown and provided to the Court and Company counsel on or before May 25, 2007
  • Company to notify Crown and Court in writing on or before May 25, 2007 if it wishes to be heard on s.19(3) issues