R. v. Mukpo

R. v. Mukpo

The Superior Court has jurisdiction under s.520 to review and vary the provincial court recognizance; adopting the reasoning in R v. Hill the court accepts a narrower interpretation of s.523(2) but nonetheless proceeded on s.520 review and, on the merits and with the Crown's consent, granted the requested variation deleting the curfew and proof-of-compliance conditions given changed circumstances and absence of risk to public safety.

Citation
2012 NSSC 107
Parties
Provincial Crown: Her Majesty The Queen; Accused: Gesar Arthur Mukpo
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Recognizance/bail Variation / Review Under S.520 Application to Vary Recognizance (curfew Conditions)
Outcome
Requested variation granted; recognizance conditions G and H varied (curfew and proof-of-compliance deleted)
Legal Topics
S.520 Criminal Code Review, S.523(2) Jurisdiction to Vacate Release Orders, Variation of Recognizance Conditions, Curfew Conditions, Interpretation of 'being Tried'
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Bail and Interim Release Procedural/jurisdictional Law S.520 Criminal Code Review S.523(2) Jurisdiction to Vacate Release Orders Variation of Recognizance Conditions Curfew Conditions Interpretation of 'being Tried'

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Provincial Crown

Gesar Arthur Mukpo

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Recognizance/bail Variation / Review Under S.520 Application to Vary Recognizance (curfew Conditions)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Superior Court has jurisdiction under s.520 to review and vary a provincial court recognizance when the Crown does not consent under s.523(2)
  2. 2 The proper interpretation of the phrase 'before which or whom an accused is being tried, at any time' in s.523(2)
  3. 3 Whether the accused has shown cause to vary the curfew and associated compliance condition on the recognizance

Ratio Decidendi

The Superior Court has jurisdiction under s.520 to review and vary the provincial court recognizance; adopting the reasoning in R v. Hill the court accepts a narrower interpretation of s.523(2) but nonetheless proceeded on s.520 review and, on the merits and with the Crown's consent, granted the requested variation deleting the curfew and proof-of-compliance conditions given changed circumstances and absence of risk to public safety.

Court Disposition

Requested variation granted; recognizance conditions G and H varied (curfew and proof-of-compliance deleted)

Orders

  • Variation granted to the recognizance issued November 14, 2011 deleting conditions G (curfew) and H (requirement to prove compliance)