R. v. A.J.
- Citation
- 2026 ONCA 337
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Decision
- 8 May 2026
- Posture
- Criminal / Motion / Appeal Concerning Non Publication Order Under S.517 Arising From a Bail Hearing
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Decision
- 8 May 2026
- Posture
- Criminal / Motion / Appeal Concerning Non Publication Order Under S.517 Arising From a Bail Hearing
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court held that the existing s.517 non-publication order precludes publication of the decision while the order remains in effect; accordingly the decision will not be posted publicly until the ban expires, but a copy is available at the Court Registry in the interim.
Court disposition
Non-publication order enforced; publication of the decision withheld until the statutory bans cease
Orders
- Decision to be posted on the Court of Appeal for Ontario website once the non-publication order ceases to be in effect
- Full decision available in the interim at the Registry of the Court of Appeal for Ontario at 130 Queen Street West, Toronto
- Matter remains subject to publication bans pursuant to YCJA s.110 and Criminal Code ss.486.5 and 517
02
Material facts
Parties
His Majesty the King
Respondent Counsel: James Clark; Alice BradstreetA.J.
Applicant Counsel: Anthony BugoAmounts and remedies
- Decision Year: 2,026
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Motion / Appeal Concerning Non Publication Order Under S.517 Arising From a Bail Hearing
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the Court of Appeal may publish its reasons while a s.517 Criminal Code non-publication order remains in force
- 02
Interaction and application of statutory publication bans (Criminal Code ss.486.5 and 517; YCJA s.110) to appellate decisions
- 03
Availability of the full decision to parties and public while ban is in effect
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Applicant sought public access to the Court of Appeal decision or immediate publication, arguing the appellate reasons should not be withheld from the public record.
- Respondent
- Respondent maintained the statutory non-publication orders under the Criminal Code and the YCJA must be respected and enforced, and that publication must be withheld until the bans lapse or are varied.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 517
Section 517 of the Criminal Code prohibits publication, broadcast or transmission of evidence taken, information given, representations made and reasons given where a non-publication order is in effect
- 02
Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 486.5; Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002, c. 1, s. 110
Section 486.5 of the Criminal Code and s.110 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act impose publication bans protecting identity and information in youth and certain criminal proceedings
- 03
Statutory scheme: Criminal Code ss. 486.5 and 517; YCJA s.110
A court must give effect to statutory publication bans and may withhold public release of its reasons until those bans cease to apply
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court held that the existing s.517 non-publication order precludes publication of the decision while the order remains in effect; accordingly the decision will not be posted publicly until the ban expires, but a copy is available at the Court Registry in the interim.
Obiter and limits
- The Court of Appeal will make the decision available on its website once the non-publication order ceases to be in effect.
- The full decision is available at the Registry of the Court of Appeal for Ontario at 130 Queen Street West, Toronto.
- The appeal is subject to publication bans pursuant to YCJA s.110 and Criminal Code ss.486.5 and 517.
Court disposition
Non-publication order enforced; publication of the decision withheld until the statutory bans cease
- Decision to be posted on the Court of Appeal for Ontario website once the non-publication order ceases to be in effect
- Full decision available in the interim at the Registry of the Court of Appeal for Ontario at 130 Queen Street West, Toronto
- Matter remains subject to publication bans pursuant to YCJA s.110 and Criminal Code ss.486.5 and 517
Source and reliance status
Court of Appeal for Ontario · 8 May 2026
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Judgment· 8 May 2026
R. v. A.J. Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2026-05-08 Neutral citation 2026 ONCA 337 Docket numbers COA-26-OM-0099 Judges Fairburn, J. Michal Subject Criminal Decision Content
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. A.J., 2026 ONCA 337[1] DATE: 20260508 DOCKET: COA-26-OM-0099 Fairburn A.C.J.O. (Motion Judge)
BETWEEN His Majesty the King Respondent and A.J. Applicant Anthony Bugo, for the applicant James Clark and Alice Bradstreet, for the respondent Heard: May 5, 2026
REASONS FOR DECISION [1] A non-publication order under s. 517 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, was imposed in this matter at the bail hearing in the court below. That s. 517 order precludes the publication, broadcast, or transmission of any evidence taken, information given, representations made, and reasons given. [2] The decision in R. v. A.J., 2026 ONCA 337, contains information covered by that order. [3] Accordingly, the decision will be available on the Court of Appeal for Ontario’s website once the non-publication order ceases to be in effect. [4] In the interim, a copy of the full decision is available at the Registry of the Court of Appeal for Ontario at 130 Queen Street West, Toronto. [1] This appeal is subject to publication bans pursuant to s. 110 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002, c. 1 (“YCJA”) and ss. 486.5 and 517 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46.
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.