Canada Case Law

R. v. Allen-Simec

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

Applications dismissed. The accused failed to show a reasonable possibility that non‑production by US authorities prejudiced his ability to make full answer and defence; disclosure to date was substantial and the alleged missing material was speculative. Hearsay reliance on US law‑enforcement information in the ITOs was permissible where the RCMP used that material as a lead, corroborated it through independent Canadian investigative steps, and presented credibly based information; on the face of the ITOs an issuing judge could have been satisfied the statutory thresholds were met. No Charter…

Source excerpt

• Charter s.7
• Charter s.8
• Charter s.11(d)
• Charter s.24(1)
• Charter s.24(2)
• Stinchcombe disclosure

Read case analysis

R. v. Calabretti

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Application for release pending appeal granted to Martino Calabretti, with the court finding the grounds of appeal were not frivolous and release was justified.

• Bail pending appeal
• Release pending appeal
• Charter s.7
• Charter s.8
• Charter s.11(d)
• Agency relationship of foreign agent

Read case analysis

R. v. Drake

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

A Charter breach of the applicant's fair trial rights cannot be found prospectively on the basis of the impugned social media posts before jury selection; the application is premature as the capacity to empanel an impartial jury must be assessed at voir dire, but the court may grant non-Charter prospective remedies including strengthening challenge for cause questions, directing police to seek removal of offending material, and excluding identified individuals from attending under s.486(1); a broad prohibition on family members publishing is overbroad and unjustified.

Source excerpt

• Charter s.7
• Charter s.11(d)
• Publication bans
• Contempt of court
• Jury selection and challenges for cause
• Pre-trial publicity

Read case analysis

Brar v. British Columbia (Securities Commission)

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal dismissed challenges to s. 144(2) of the Securities Act and refused broad disclosure from a BC Securities Commission investigation.

• Contempt
• Summons and compulsory testimony
• Charter s.7
• Charter s.11(d)
• S.96 constitutional protection of superior courts
• Stinchcombe disclosure

Read case analysis

R. v. K.J.M.J.

Court

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

The judge's September 26 email is part of the record; no privilege attached to the in‑court comments; the judge's emphatic pre‑argument conclusions (predetermination on one count) and prior credibility/character findings, together with his attempt to expunge the remarks and restrict access to recordings, give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias; convictions set aside and a new trial ordered.

Source excerpt

• Reasonable apprehension of bias
• Judicial bias
• Predetermination of guilt
• Record on appeal (s.682(1))
• Privilege of judges
• Charter s.11(d)

Read case analysis

R. v. D.N.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The presumptions in ss.171.1(3) and 172.2(3) violate s.11(d) of the Charter and cannot be saved; the trial judge relied on those presumptions in convicting the appellant on multiple child exploitation counts involving non‑testifying alleged victims; accordingly those convictions are set aside and new trials ordered; the proviso is not applied because appellate fact‑finding would be extensive and would unfairly deprive the appellant of trial under the correct legal regime; the global determinate sentence is otherwise fit and is upheld except where individual counts produced illegal determinate…

Source excerpt

• Child exploitation
• Presumption of belief as to age
• Charter s.11(d)
• Proviso s.686(1)(b)(iii)
• Dangerous offender
• Long-term supervision order

Read case analysis

R. v. Bzezi

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

Trial judge's accepted factual findings that the HTA licence check was the legitimate purpose of the stop and that the accused fled and dropped a firearm were open to the judge; only s.10(a) delay was conceded but, applying Grant, exclusion was not warranted because the breach was low on seriousness, police acted in good faith, the gun was not discovered as a result of the breach and admission would not bring administration of justice into disrepute; circumstantial evidence permitted only the logical inference of possession; sentence was fit and entitled to deference.

Source excerpt

• Charter s.7
• Charter s.9
• Charter s.10(a)
• Charter s.10(b)
• Charter s.11(d)
• S.24(2) exclusion of evidence

Read case analysis

R. v. Alkhalil

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed a pre-trial lost-evidence application, finding the requested sales data were not in police possession or control and were not first-party disclosure.

• Lost evidence
• Disclosure obligations
• Preservation of evidence
• First party vs third party disclosure
• Stinchcombe
• Vukelich

Read case analysis

U.S.A. v. Lim

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed Mr. Lim’s application for a voir dire and renewed disclosure request in extradition proceedings, finding no air of reality and relying on prior guilty-plea waiver principles.

• Charter s.7
• Charter s.9
• Charter s.10
• Charter s.11(d)
• Charter s.24
• Voice identification evidence

Read case analysis

Thibault v. Canada (Director of Military Prosecutions)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed Sergeant Thibault’s motion for an interim writ of prohibition, holding he had not shown irreparable harm or a favourable balance of convenience.

• Recusal
• Reasonable apprehension of bias
• Writ of prohibition
• Interim relief
• Judicial review
• Mandamus

Read case analysis