R. v. Boyd

R. v. Boyd

Although the Crown proved actus reus (39 traps set inside closed buffer zone), the accused established on the balance of probabilities that he exercised due diligence in all of the circumstances by promptly self-reporting the error to DFO, stopping the trip before any crab were landed, fully complying with DFO directions to release crab and move traps, and thus rectifying the contravention before the act of 'fishing' was completed; accordingly acquittal was required despite principal-agent liability principles applying to the underlying mistake.

Citation
2010 NSPC 5
Parties
Informant: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Robert Francis Boyd
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Fisheries Act Offence / Trial Decision (provincial Court)
Outcome
Acquitted
Legal Topics
Strict Liability, Due Diligence Defence, Agency/principal Liability, Interpretation of 'fishing', Variation Order Compliance, Self Reporting
Source Language
English
Fisheries Law Criminal Law Regulatory Law Strict Liability Due Diligence Defence Agency/principal Liability Interpretation of 'fishing' Variation Order Compliance +1 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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Informant

Robert Francis Boyd

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Fisheries Act Offence / Trial Decision (provincial Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether accused exercised all due diligence to avoid committing the strict liability offence
  2. 2 Whether accused reasonably and honestly believed in a state of facts that would render conduct innocent
  3. 3 Whether accused is responsible for acts of agent under s.78.3 of the Fisheries Act

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Crown proved actus reus (39 traps set inside closed buffer zone), the accused established on the balance of probabilities that he exercised due diligence in all of the circumstances by promptly self-reporting the error to DFO, stopping the trip before any crab were landed, fully complying with DFO directions to release crab and move traps, and thus rectifying the contravention before the act of 'fishing' was completed; accordingly acquittal was required despite principal-agent liability principles applying to the underlying mistake.

Court Disposition

Acquitted

Orders

  • Accused Robert Francis Boyd is acquitted of the charge laid in Information 2065092.
  • No crab were landed or forfeited and no conviction is recorded.