R. v. P.T.C.

R. v. P.T.C.

The s.11(b) application fails because the post‑charge period from information to anticipated trial completion is within the Jordan 18‑month presumptive ceiling (16 months) and s.11(b) does not apply to pre‑charge delay; the pre‑charge delay, while regrettable, did not amount to abuse of process under s.7 because it did not cause actual prejudice to the accused's ability to make full answer and defence nor did it undermine the integrity of the judicial process; therefore no stay was warranted and the Charter applications are dismissed.

Citation
2018 NSPC 6
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: P.T.C.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Historic Sexual Offences; Charter Applications / Pre Trial Charter Applications Under S.7 and S.11(b) Seeking Stay
Outcome
Charter applications dismissed; no stay of proceedings granted; matter to proceed to trial
Legal Topics
S.11(b) Delay, Pre Charge Delay, Post Charge Delay, Abuse of Process, Stay of Proceedings, Jordan Framework, Publication Ban S.486.4
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Charter Rights Youth Criminal Justice Procedural Law Sexual Offences Administrative Law S.11(b) Delay Pre Charge Delay +5 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

P.T.C.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Historic Sexual Offences; Charter Applications / Pre Trial Charter Applications Under S.7 and S.11(b) Seeking Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.11(b) Charter right to trial within a reasonable time was breached by pre‑ and post‑charge delay
  2. 2 Whether pre‑charge delay constitutes abuse of process under s.7 of the Charter
  3. 3 Whether youth of the accused requires a lower presumptive ceiling for delay analysis

Ratio Decidendi

The s.11(b) application fails because the post‑charge period from information to anticipated trial completion is within the Jordan 18‑month presumptive ceiling (16 months) and s.11(b) does not apply to pre‑charge delay; the pre‑charge delay, while regrettable, did not amount to abuse of process under s.7 because it did not cause actual prejudice to the accused's ability to make full answer and defence nor did it undermine the integrity of the judicial process; therefore no stay was warranted and the Charter applications are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Charter applications dismissed; no stay of proceedings granted; matter to proceed to trial

Orders

  • Charter applications under ss.7 and 11(b) denied
  • No stay of proceedings; trial to proceed as scheduled