R. v. Gunarajah
Although the identification evidence contained frailties, parts were corroborated and the verdict was not unreasonable; however, a procedural error in the challenge for cause process during jury selection warranted quashing the convictions and ordering a new trial.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C38801, C38802, C38820, C38821
- Parties
- Appellant: SRITHAJAH GUNARAJAH; Appellant: NIRMALAJAH GUNARAJAH; Appellant: UTHAYARAJAH GUNARAJAH; Appellant: JEGATEESAN RAMASAMY; Respondent: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 2 July 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Jury Conviction; Convictions Quashed and New Trial Ordered
- Outcome
- Appeals allowed; convictions quashed; new trial ordered.
- Legal Topics
- Conviction Appeal, Jury Selection, Challenge for Cause, Identification Evidence, New Trial
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
SRITHAJAH GUNARAJAH
Appellant
NIRMALAJAH GUNARAJAH
Appellant
UTHAYARAJAH GUNARAJAH
Appellant
JEGATEESAN RAMASAMY
Appellant
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Jury Conviction; Convictions Quashed and New Trial Ordered
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the jury verdict was unreasonable based on the identification evidence
- 2 Whether errors in the challenge for cause procedure during jury selection require quashing convictions and ordering a new trial
- 3 Whether independent evidence corroborated the complainant's identification sufficiently to sustain the verdict
Ratio Decidendi
Although the identification evidence contained frailties, parts were corroborated and the verdict was not unreasonable; however, a procedural error in the challenge for cause process during jury selection warranted quashing the convictions and ordering a new trial.
Court Disposition
Appeals allowed; convictions quashed; new trial ordered.
Orders
- Appeals allowed
- Convictions quashed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
R. v. Gunarajah Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2004-07-02 Docket numbers C38801, C38802, C38820/C38821 Judges Rosenberg, Marc; Feldman, Kathryn N.; Sharpe, Robert J. Subject Criminal Decision Content DATE: 20040702 DOCKET: C38801/C38802 C38820/C38821 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Respondent) – and – SRITHAJAH GUNARAJAH, NIRMALAJAH GUNARAJAH, UTHAYARAJAH GUNARAJAH and JEGATEESAN RAMASAMY (Appellants) BEFORE: ROSENBERG, FELDMAN and SHARPE JJ.A. COUNSEL: Jennifer Budgell for the appellant S. Gunarajah Timothy Breen for the appellant N. Gunarajah Peter Connelly for the appellants U. Gunarajah and J. Ramasamy Feroza Bhabha for the respondent HEARD & ENDORSED: June 29, 2004 On appeal from conviction by Justice Bruce C. Hawkins of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting with a jury, on February 21, 2002. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] There was direct evidence from the complainant identifying N. Gunarajah as the driver of the vehicle and a party to the offence. The complainant knew the appellant. While there are some frailties in the complainant’s evidence, some parts of his evidence are confirmed by independent evidence. We cannot say that the verdict is unreasonable. [2] We agree with Crown counsel that the appeal must be allowed and a new trial ordered on the basis of the challenge for cause procedure. [3] Accordingly, the appeals are allowed, the convictions are quashed and a new trial ordered.