R. v. Tri-M Systems

R. v. Tri-M Systems

The Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to discharge or vary an order refusing leave to appeal under Offence Act s.124; given the importance and risk of conflicting decisions on Motor Vehicle Act s.83.1 and its interaction with Charter s.11(d), conditional leave to appeal is granted restricted to the s.11(d) issue and the Crown is permitted to adduce affidavit evidence on the s.1 justification, with the appellant permitted to apply in chambers to file evidence if necessary.

Citation
2000 BCCA 97
Parties
Appellant: Tri-M Systems; Respondent: Regina
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (leave to Appeal Under Offence Act S.124) / Application for Leave to Appeal Before the Court of Appeal; Disposition on Jurisdiction and Conditional Grant of Leave
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted, limited to the s.11(d) Charter issue; Court of Appeal affirms its jurisdiction to discharge or vary a judge's refusal of leave.
Legal Topics
Charter S.11(d), Motor Vehicle Act S.83.1 (photo Radar), Leave to Appeal Under Offence Act S.124, Court of Appeal Jurisdiction Under Court of Appeal Act, Section 1 Charter Justification Evidence
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Appellate Procedure Charter S.11(d) Motor Vehicle Act S.83.1 (photo Radar) Leave to Appeal Under Offence Act S.124 Court of Appeal Jurisdiction Under Court of Appeal Act Section 1 Charter Justification Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tri-M Systems

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (leave to Appeal Under Offence Act S.124) / Application for Leave to Appeal Before the Court of Appeal; Disposition on Jurisdiction and Conditional Grant of Leave

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal has power under the Court of Appeal Act to discharge or vary an order of a judge refusing leave to appeal under s.124 of the Offence Act
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to determine the constitutionality of s.83.1 of the Motor Vehicle Act under s.11(d) of the Charter
  3. 3 Whether the Crown may adduce affidavit evidence in the Court of Appeal to support a s.1 justification

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to discharge or vary an order refusing leave to appeal under Offence Act s.124; given the importance and risk of conflicting decisions on Motor Vehicle Act s.83.1 and its interaction with Charter s.11(d), conditional leave to appeal is granted restricted to the s.11(d) issue and the Crown is permitted to adduce affidavit evidence on the s.1 justification, with the appellant permitted to apply in chambers to file evidence if necessary.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted, limited to the s.11(d) Charter issue; Court of Appeal affirms its jurisdiction to discharge or vary a judge's refusal of leave.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted restricted to the s.11(d) Charter issue
  • Crown is at liberty to adduce affidavit evidence on the s.1 Charter justification in the Court of Appeal