Canada Case Law

Prince Edward Island Potato Board v. Canada (Agriculture and Agri-Food)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Ministerial Order was reasonable because the CFIA record contained objectively discernible facts and a rational chain of analysis that supported a reasonable suspicion that PEI (including unregulated fields) was exposed to potato wart, and once the statutory threshold was met the Minister permissibly considered trade consequences in exercising her discretionary authority under s.15(3).

Source excerpt

• Plant protection
• Potato wart (synchytrium endobioticum)
• Infested place
• Ministerial order under s.15(3)
• Reasonable suspicion
• Judicial review

Read case analysis

R. v. Sabiston

Court

Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada restored a firearms conviction, holding the trial judge did not err in the s. 24(2) exclusion analysis and that the firearm was discoverable.

• Section 24(2) exclusion
• Investigative detention
• Search incident to arrest
• Reasonable suspicion
• Discoverability
• Section-24-2-exclusion

Read case analysis

R. v. Buffong

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The conviction is maintained because the totality of the circumstances, including a corroborated confidential informant tip and police observations at a bus station, provided reasonable suspicion for an investigative detention; the pat-down and search of the satchel worn on the person were lawful officer-safety measures under s.8; the trial judge's Grant error was not outcome-determinative because discoverability was properly considered under the second branch and admission of the firearm did not bring the administration of justice into disrepute; the sentencing reliance on the informant tip…

Source excerpt

• Investigative detention
• Reasonable suspicion
• Confidential informant tips
• Debot factors
• Officer safety pat-down
• S.8 search

Read case analysis

R. v. Handley

Court

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Where the statutory elements of s.320.27(2) were objectively satisfied (lawful traffic stop, observed operation of a vehicle, officer in possession of an approved screening device), the ASD demand was lawful under that subsection even though the officer subjectively believed she was relying on s.320.27(1)(b); no s.8 breach arose on these facts, the informal roadside s.10(b) advice followed by a prompt verbatim reading at the detachment satisfied the informational duty, the ASD and subsequent breath samples were admissible under s.24(2), and the Crown proved the s.320.14(1)(b) over‑80 mg offen…

Source excerpt

• Impaired driving
• Approved screening device (asd) demand
• Reasonable suspicion
• Mandatory asd demand s.320.27(2)
• Section 8 search and seizure
• Section 10(b) right to counsel

Read case analysis

Toor v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Judicial review of an immediate roadside prohibition was dismissed. The court found the demand for a breath sample was valid and no reasonable excuse was proven.

• Immediate roadside prohibition
• Reasonable suspicion
• Approved screening device (asd) demand
• Refusal to provide breath sample
• Judicial review standard of review
• Credibility assessment

Read case analysis

R. v. Islam

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed a s. 8 Charter challenge to a tracking warrant, finding the affidavit met the reasonable suspicion standard under s. 492.1(1) of the Criminal Code.

• Section 8 charter
• Tracking warrant (s.492.1 criminal code)
• Reasonable suspicion
• Confidential informant reliability
• Section-8-charter
• Tracking-warrant

Read case analysis

R. v. Krawczyk

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The trial judge’s assessment of the police agent’s evidence was insufficient because he failed to grapple with the agent’s overwhelming credibility problems and the Crown did not put independent evidence before the court to establish reasonable suspicion; the appellant’s later eagerness and familiarity with drug vernacular could not alone corroborate the agent’s account of who initiated the scheme, therefore the convictions must be quashed and a new trial ordered limited to the entrapment/stay issue.

Source excerpt

• Entrapment
• Abuse of process
• Reasonable suspicion
• Credibility of informant
• Disclosure of police grounds

Read case analysis

R. v. Perri

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed Mr. Perri’s appeal, holding the trial judge made no reversible error in rejecting entrapment based on the call phrase “I’m looking for 80”.

• Entrapment
• Dial-a-dope investigations
• Reasonable suspicion
• Abuse of process
• Police investigative conduct
• Reasonable-suspicion

Read case analysis

Robson v. Law Society of Ontario

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The motion to extend time was dismissed because the proposed appeal lacked merit: the Law Society had reasonable suspicion to investigate based on the client complaint and related materials and there is no requirement that the suspicion be founded exclusively on legally admissible evidence in the regulatory investigatory context; therefore extension of time to seek leave was not justified.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Reasonable suspicion
• Investigative powers
• Law society act s.49.3
• Leave to appeal

Read case analysis

Nguyen v. Superintendent (Motor Vehicles)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court set aside an IRP decision after finding the adjudicator’s reasons on reasonable suspicion were not transparent or sufficiently responsive to the evidence.

• Immediate roadside prohibition
• Reasonable suspicion
• Asd (approved screening device) demand
• Standard of review (reasonableness)
• Credibility and reasons
• Immediate-roadside-prohibition

Read case analysis