R. v. CB

R. v. CB

The court held the s.11(b) clock begins when the Information is sworn, the 18‑month presumptive ceiling applies because the re‑election occurred before any preliminary inquiry, and after deducting attributable defence delay (or apportioning overlapping delay) the net delay fell below the 18‑month ceiling;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2022 NSPC 47
Parties
Crown: His Majesty the King; Accused: C.B.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Charter S.11(b) Stay Application After Trial (post Trial)
Outcome
Application dismissed; no stay under s.11(b) granted
Legal Topics
Right to Be Tried Within a Reasonable Time, Unreasonable Delay, Jordan Framework, Preliminary Inquiry, Re‑election, Disclosure Obligations, Apportionment of Delay
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Right to Be Tried Within a Reasonable Time Unreasonable Delay Jordan Framework Preliminary Inquiry Re‑election +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

His Majesty the King

Crown

C.B.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Charter S.11(b) Stay Application After Trial (post Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does the s.11(b) Jordan clock start (arrest vs. information sworn)?
  2. 2 Which presumptive ceiling applies (18 months v. 30 months) where accused re‑elected before preliminary inquiry?
  3. 3 Whether delay was unreasonable after deducting defence delay and/or exceptional circumstances and appropriate apportionment of delay

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the s.11(b) clock begins when the Information is sworn, the 18‑month presumptive ceiling applies because the re‑election occurred before any preliminary inquiry, and after deducting attributable defence delay (or apportioning overlapping delay) the net delay fell below the 18‑month ceiling; accordingly there was no s.11(b) breach and the stay application was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; no stay under s.11(b) granted

Orders

  • Application for stay of proceedings under s.11(b) dismissed