Canada Judgment

Supreme Court of Canada

R. v. Murdock

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Applying the Morin framework, the Court held the delay in this case was not unreasonable; the stay of proceedings was not warranted and the appellant's appeal was dismissed.

Court disposition

Appeal dismissed; delay held not unreasonable.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Stay of proceedings set aside

02

Material facts

Parties

Terrance Murdock

Appellant Counsel: Christopher McAviney

Her Majesty The Queen

Respondent Counsel: Scott C. Hutchison; David G. Algie

Amounts and remedies

  • Case Number: 22,632
  • Decision Year: 1,992

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal Appeal (charter S.11(b) Trial Within a Reasonable Time) / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Ontario Court of Appeal

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Appellant argued that the delay between charge and trial was unreasonable under s.11(b) of the Charter and that a stay of proceedings was required.
Respondent
Crown argued the delay was not unreasonable under the Morin framework and that the stay ordered by the trial judge should be set aside.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771

    Test for unreasonable delay as set out in R. v. Morin

  2. 02

    Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms s.11(b)

    Right to be tried within a reasonable time

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Applying the Morin framework, the Court held the delay in this case was not unreasonable; the stay of proceedings was not warranted and the appellant's appeal was dismissed.

Court disposition

Appeal dismissed; delay held not unreasonable.

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Stay of proceedings set aside

Source and reliance status

Supreme Court of Canada · 4 June 1992

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.

Source document

Supreme Court of Canada

Judgment· 4 June 1992

[1992] 2 SCR 164

R. v. Murdock Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1992-06-04 Report [1992] 2 SCR 164 Case number 22632 Judges L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Sopinka, John; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; McLachlin, Beverley; Iacobucci, Frank On appeal from Ontario Subjects Constitutional law Notes SCC Case Information: 22632 Decision Content R. v. Murdock, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 164 Terrance Murdock Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Indexed as: R. v. Murdock File No.: 22632. 1992: June 4. Present: L'Heureux‑Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario Constitutional law ‑‑ Charter of Rights ‑‑ Trial within a reasonable time ‑‑ Delay in this case not unreasonable. Cases Cited Applied: R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R.

771. APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal rendered September 5, 1991 allowing the Crown's appeal from a stay of proceedings ordered by Beaulne Prov. Ct. J. Appeal dismissed. Christopher McAviney, for the appellant. Scott C. Hutchison and David G. Algie, for the respondent. The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by //L'Heureux-Dubé J.// L'Heureux‑Dubé J. ‑‑ It will not be necessary to hear from you Mr. Hutchison. The Court is ready to hand down judgment. The judgment will be pronounced by Mr. Justice Sopinka. //Sopinka J.// Sopinka J. ‑‑ This appeal, which is here as of right, is governed by the principles expressed by this Court in R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771, released March 26, 1992. Applying those principles, we agree with the conclusion of the Court of Appeal that the delay in this case was not unreasonable. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Judgment accordingly. Solicitor for the appellant: Christopher R. McAviney, Ottawa. Solicitor for the respondent: The Attorney General for Ontario, Toronto.

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

R. v. Morin, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 771

Case cited

R. v. Murdock, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 164

Case cited

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms s.11(b)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

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.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.