Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal upheld a forfeiture order over cash seized from Marcel Breton’s garage, rejecting issue estoppel and allowing a fresh s. 24(2) analysis.
The trial judge did not err in declining to hear the late mid-trial s.8 application or in her factual findings that the drugs were in plain view and that the appellant's remaining at the scene did not raise a reasonable inference of innocence; those findings were reasonable and entitled to deference, rendering the conviction reasonable on the evidence, but the $110 cash possession count lacked sufficient evidence and must be acquitted.
Source excerpt
On review of the sealed unredacted ITO the issuing justice could have properly inferred the son’s residential attachment and issued the warrant; the Crown’s concession to exclude inculpatory statements mitigated s.10(b) impact and, after a Grant balancing that gave deference to the trial judge, the firearms were admissible because the breaches, while serious, had limited impact given lack of causal connection and discoverability; convictions for possession were reasonable; one s.95(1) conviction for the non‑restricted Winchester was set aside and replaced with a s.92(1) conviction; the senten…
Source excerpt
The court upheld the arrest and incidental search of Michael John Dubensky on reasonable and probable grounds, but found a breach of his s. 10(b) right to counsel.
The appeal is dismissed because there was no error in the trial judge’s s.24(2) Grant analysis and the discretionary decision to admit the evidence should not be disturbed, so the convictions are upheld.
Source excerpt
The 444‑day failure to file the Initial Report to Justice constituted an unreasonable seizure and a serious s.8 Charter breach; balancing under Grant required exclusion of the evidence and a stay of the child pornography charges arising from that evidence.
Source excerpt
The Court dismissed the appeal and refused the motion for fresh evidence because the trial judge did not misapprehend evidence, made legally sound circumstantial inferences, the guilty verdicts were reasonable and supported by the evidence (including direct observation of drugs falling from the appellant and supporting trafficking indicators), and trial counsel's conduct fell within reasonable professional judgment with no demonstrated prejudice; the innocence-at-stake threshold to pierce informer privilege was not met.
Source excerpt
The s. 684 order is granted because the applicant lacks means, has presented at least two non-frivolous arguable grounds concerning the validity of the warrant and alleged impermissible amplification of the ITO, and the legal issues are sufficiently complex and the applicant is sufficiently impaired that funded counsel is necessary to effectively advance the appeal and assist the court.
Source excerpt
The court held that sharing some unlawfully obtained search materials with other police agencies breached s. 8 of the Charter, but declined to find a breach for targeted dissemination of a Project Reality database.
The court dismissed a Charter s. 8 application challenging wiretap recording during selective monitoring, holding the authorization permitted recording without prior confirmation of the target’s presence.
Explore more
