Canada Judgment

Court of Appeal for Ontario

R. v. Zadi

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Because no federal statutory right of appeal exists for bail review decisions under ss. 520 or 521 of the Criminal Code and provincial statute cannot confer such a right, the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction and the appeal must be quashed.

Court disposition

Appeal quashed for want of jurisdiction.

Orders

  • Appeal quashed for want of jurisdiction
  • Application to adduce fresh evidence not considered as it was unnecessary

02

Material facts

Parties

His Majesty the King

Respondent Counsel: David Friesen

Ala Zadi

Appellant

Amounts and remedies

  • Number of Judges: 3

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal / Appeal From Superior Court Bail Review Decision (s. 520 Criminal Code)

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Appellant sought to appeal the denial of his bail review; he acknowledged the Criminal Code does not provide a right of appeal but invoked s. 6(1)(b) of the Courts of Justice Act and asserted that Charter issues were engaged.
Respondent
Crown moved to quash for want of jurisdiction, arguing that appeal rights in criminal matters must be created by federal criminal legislation, that provincial statute cannot confer such a right, and that Charter issues do not create an appeal route absent statutory authorization.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    R. v. Antic, 2017 SCC 27, para 18; R. v. Thangarajah, 2025 ONCA 897, para 8

    Appeal rights in criminal matters must be created by federal criminal legislation.

  2. 02

    R. v. Scherba (2001), 54 O.R. (3d) 555 (C.A.)

    Provincial legislation cannot supply a right of appeal in criminal matters to the Court of Appeal.

  3. 03

    Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46; R. v. Antic, 2017 SCC 27

    Absence of a federal statutory route to appeal from a bail review under ss. 520/521 means the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Because no federal statutory right of appeal exists for bail review decisions under ss. 520 or 521 of the Criminal Code and provincial statute cannot confer such a right, the Court of Appeal lacks jurisdiction and the appeal must be quashed.

Obiter and limits

  • It was unnecessary to address the appellant's application to adduce fresh evidence.
  • Even if the superior court's decision disposed of Charter claims, a right of appeal must be derived from a statutory source.

Court disposition

Appeal quashed for want of jurisdiction.

  • Appeal quashed for want of jurisdiction
  • Application to adduce fresh evidence not considered as it was unnecessary

Source and reliance status

Court of Appeal for Ontario · 24 February 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.

Source document

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Judgment· 24 February 2026

2026 ONCA 134

R. v. Zadi Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2026-02-24 Neutral citation 2026 ONCA 134 Docket numbers COA-25-CR-0938 Judges Trotter, Gary T.; Monahan, Patrick J.; Dawe, Jonathan Subject Criminal Decision Content

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO CITATION: R. v. Zadi, 2026 ONCA 134 DATE: 20260224 DOCKET: COA-25-CR-0938 Trotter, Monahan and Dawe JJ.A.

BETWEEN His Majesty the King Respondent and Ala Zadi Appellant Ala Zadi, acting in person David Friesen, for the respondent Heard and rendered orally: February 23, 2026 On appeal from the bail review decision of Justice David E. Harris of the Superior Court of Justice, on July 16, 2025.

REASONS FOR DECISION [1] Ala Zadi seeks to appeal a decision of a judge of the Superior Court of Justice denying his application for a bail review under s. 520 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46. In response, the Crown moves to quash the appeal for want of jurisdiction. [2] The Criminal Code does not provide any right of appeal to this court from bail review decisions under ss. 520 or 521: see R. v. Antic, 2017 SCC 27, [2017] 1 S.C.R. 509, at para.

18. Mr. Zadi acknowledges this, and seeks to invoke s. 6(1)(b) of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43. However, his reliance on provincial legislation to give him a right of appeal in a criminal case is misplaced, since “appeal rights in criminal matters must be created by federal criminal legislation”: R. v. Thangarajah, 2025 ONCA 897, at para. 8, leave to appeal to S.C.C. requested, 42166; see also R. v. J.M., 2021 ONCA 735, 158 O.R. (3d) 81, at paras. 25-26. It makes no difference that Mr. Zadi claims that his appeal raises Charter issues, since “a right of appeal must be derived from a statutory source”: R. v. Scherba (2001), 54 O.R. (3d) 555 (C.A.), at para 10. Even if Mr. Zadi is correct that Harris J.’s decision amounted to a final order disposing of his Charter claims, there is no route under federal legislation by which this order can be appealed to this court. [3] We accordingly quash Mr. Zadi’s appeal for want of jurisdiction. This makes it unnecessary for us to address his application to adduce fresh evidence on his appeal. “Gary Trotter J.A.” “P.J. Monahan J.A.” “J. Dawe J.A.”

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. Antic, 2017 SCC 27, [2017] 1 S.C.R. 509

Case cited

R. v. Thangarajah, 2025 ONCA 897

Case cited

R. v. J.M., 2021 ONCA 735, 158 O.R. (3d) 81

Case cited

R. v. Scherba (2001), 54 O.R. (3d) 555 (C.A.)

Case cited

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, ss. 520, 521

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s. 6(1)(b)

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

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.