R. v. Lee
- Citation
- 2003 BCSC 2041
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Supreme Court of British Columbia
- Decision
- 15 January 2003
- Posture
- Criminal / Voir Dire Stage One Ruling Re Informant Identity
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Supreme Court of British Columbia
- Decision
- 15 January 2003
- Posture
- Criminal / Voir Dire Stage One Ruling Re Informant Identity
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The court ruled that the first stage of the two-stage test was satisfied because the affidavit contained unedited informant statements that provided some evidentiary basis that disclosure of the informant's identity could raise a reasonable doubt about the accused's guilt.
Court disposition
First stage of the informant identity disclosure test met.
Orders
- First stage of informant identity disclosure test met; matter to proceed to stage two.
02
Material facts
Parties
Her Majesty the Queen
Crown Counsel: M.M.M. Devlin; J.K. TorranceSee Chun Lee
Accused Counsel: P. Leask, Q.C.; D. JevningChuk Fong Tao
Accused Counsel: D.B.L. SokolAmounts and remedies
- Year of Decision: 2,003
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire Stage One Ruling Re Informant Identity
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the first stage of the two-stage test for disclosure of an informant's identity is met
- 02
Whether the affidavit provides an evidentiary basis that disclosure could raise a reasonable doubt about the accused's guilt
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Defence relied on unedited portions of the affidavit containing informant statements and argued that this provides an evidentiary basis that disclosure of the informant's identity could raise a reasonable doubt about guilt.
- Respondent
- Crown argued against disclosure and submitted that those arguments were more appropriately directed to stage two where the likelihood of the evidence raising a reasonable doubt and the purpose of the evidence are examined.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Common law as applied in British Columbia courts
Two-stage test for disclosure of informant identity; stage one requires some evidentiary basis that disclosure could raise a reasonable doubt.
- 02
Common law as applied in British Columbia courts
Threshold at stage one is low and requires some evidentiary basis rather than proof of likely exculpatory effect.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The court ruled that the first stage of the two-stage test was satisfied because the affidavit contained unedited informant statements that provided some evidentiary basis that disclosure of the informant's identity could raise a reasonable doubt about the accused's guilt.
Obiter and limits
- Crown's submissions were more appropriately directed to stage two concerning the likelihood that the evidence would raise a reasonable doubt and the purpose for which the defence sought disclosure.
Court disposition
First stage of the informant identity disclosure test met.
- First stage of informant identity disclosure test met; matter to proceed to stage two.
Source and reliance status
Supreme Court of British Columbia · 15 January 2003
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.
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Judgment· 15 January 2003
2003 BCSC 2041 R. v. Lee Citation: R. v. Lee Date: 20030115 2003 BCSC 2041 Docket: CC010051 Registry: Vancouver
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Ruling on Stage One of Test re Informant Identity on voir dire The Honourable Mr. Justice Cullen January 15, 2003
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
AGAINST
SEE CHUN LEE
CHUK FONG TAO Counsel for Crown M.M.M. Devlin J.K. Torrance Counsel for Defendant Lee P. Leask, Q.C. D. Jevning Counsel for Defendant Tao D.B.L. Sokol Place and Date of Hearing: Vancouver, B.C. January 15, 2003 BAN ON PUBLICATION 648 CCC [1] THE COURT: I think the basis before me is a little more than speculation in the sense that there is no speculation about what has been said by the informants to the police officers. That is incorporated into the affidavit, the portion of the affidavit that had not been edited, and it is that which is relied on by counsel for the accused, and it seems to me that the information that has been pointed to by counsel for the accused does come to the threshold, under the stage 1 test, of there being some evidentiary basis for the claim that disclosure of the informant's identity could raise a reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused. [2] I am alive to the arguments made on behalf of the Crown, but I think those arguments ultimately are more appropriately directed towards the second stage of the test, in which the likelihood of the evidence raising a reasonable doubt and the purpose of the evidence sought by the defence is in question. [3] So I will rule that the first stage of the test has been met. _________ The Honourable Mr. Justice Cullen
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.