IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA. Citation: R. v. McCarthy s Roofing Limited, 2016 NSPC 21

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA. Citation: R. v. McCarthy s Roofing Limited, 2016 NSPC 21"

Transcription

1 IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. McCarthy s Roofing Limited, 2016 NSPC 21 Date: March 31, 2016 Docket: , , , Registry: Halifax Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. McCarthy s Roofing Limited Decision on Application for Particulars Judge: The Honourable Judge Anne S. Derrick Heard: March 10, 2016 Decision: March 31, 2016 Charges: Counsel: Section 74(1)(a) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.N.S. 1996, C. 7 x 4 Alex Keaveny, for the Crown Brad Proctor, for the Defendant

2 2 By the Court: Introduction [1] This decision deals with an application for particulars in a prosecution against McCarthy s Roofing ( McCarthy s ) for offences under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.N.S. 1996, C.7 ( OHSA ). McCarthy s was charged following a Department of Labour investigation into a very serious accident at a construction site on September 9, [2] McCarthy s seeks an order for particulars pursuant to section 587(1)(f) of the Criminal Code in relation to two of the four charges it faces, Counts 1 and 2 of the Information. McCarthy s argues that particulars are essential for it to make a full answer and defence to these general duty charges. [3] The Crown says everything McCarthy s needs for full answer and defence is in the disclosure. The Crown also says there is a vein of coherence that runs through all four charges in the Information: Counts 3 and 4 talk about the same hazards that are targeted by the general duty charges. The General Duty Charges [4] The two general duty offences with which McCarthy s has been charged state that between September 6 and September 9, 2013, McCarthy s Count 1 Did as a Constructor, fail to take every reasonable precaution to ensure the health and safety of a person at a workplace pursuant to section 15(a) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, thereby committing an offence contrary to subsection 74(1)(a) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.N.S C.7 as amended; And furthermore,

3 3 Count 2 Did as a Constructor, fail to ensure communication between the employers and self-employed persons at the project of information necessary to the health and safety of persons at the project pursuant to section 15 (c) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, thereby committing an offence contrary to section 74(1)(a) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.N.S C.7 as amended. [5] Counts 1 and 2 track the language of the legislation: subsection 15(a) of the OHSA provides that Every constructor shall take every precaution that is reasonable in the circumstances to ensure the health and safety of persons at or near a project and subsection 15(c) mandates that constructors take every reasonable precaution in the circumstances to ensure communication between employers and self-employed persons at the project of information necessary to the health and safety of persons at the project [6] McCarthy s describes Counts 1 and 2 as a rearranged cut and paste of the legislative provisions. McCarthy s submits that in order for it to understand the case it must meet, the charges in relation to section 15 of the OHSA need to be particularized beyond the generic language of the statute. Particulars An Overview [7] The 1974 decision of the Ontario High Court of Justice in R. v. Canadian General Electric Co. is often referred to for its description of the two-fold function of particulars: ensuring the ability to make full answer and defence and facilitating the administration of justice. (R. v. Canadian General Electric Co., [1974] O.J. No. 13 (H.C.J.), paragraph 35) The Court held that: Particulars are due whenever justice would be imperiled if particulars are withheld. (paragraph 33) [8] Ordering particulars has implications for the prosecution of the case. Particulars form part of the indictment and like the other elements of the indictment, must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. (R. v. Saunders, [1990] S.C.J. No. 22, paragraphs 5 and 6; R. v. Dalton, [1999] N.J. No. 388, paragraph

4 4 11 (Nfld. S.C.)) An order for particulars necessarily leads to constraints on the Crown s conduct of its case. The Crown s Case according to the Disclosure [9] The Crown s Brief dated February 11, 2016 provides a sampling of the disclosure which I reviewed with McCarthy s consent to obtain an understanding of the intended prosecution. (This is how the particulars applications were proceeded with in R. v. Clarke, [2014] N.S.J. No. 242 (S.C.), paragraph 41 and R. v. R.D. Longard Services Limited, [2014] N.S.J. No. 646 (P.C.), paragraph 10) [10] The facts to be alleged were also referenced by Mr. Proctor in his oral submissions. It is important to note at this stage of the proceedings that McCarthy s is not admitting to any facts and no facts have been proven. [11] On September 9, 2013, Christopher Conrod was severely injured on a construction site at Dalhousie University ( Dalhousie ). When Mr. Conrod activated power to a swing stage suspended platform a metal outrigger fell on him. (Crown Brief, page 5) [12] Various companies were under contract with Dalhousie for the construction project, including the company Mr. Conrod worked for, Economy Glass. Aecon Construction was awarded the contract for Construction Management Services. (Crown brief, Tab 2, page 2) [13] McCarthy s Roofing was contracted by Dalhousie to do the roofing. Northfield Glass Ltd., operating as Economy Glass, had the window installation contract. Flynn Canada Ltd. ( Flynn ) had the contract for installing the siding. To do its work, Flynn rented a swing stage. Economy Glass used the swing stage when Flynn was not using it. [14] The swing stage was suspended by wire ropes strung from metal out-riggers that extended out from a parapet wall on the roof of the building being constructed. The outriggers were held in place by counter weights and wire ropes attached to tie-back safety anchors mounted on the roof. (Crown Brief, page 4 and Tab 4A, Photographs 0664, 0665, 0668, 0673, 0676, 0677)

5 5 [15] McCarthy s roofing work required the swing stage to be dismantled. They had requested through Aecon to have the swing stage and its related components disassembled so they could undertake roofing work on the building. (Crown Brief, page 4) Aecon asked Flynn to dismantle the stage and move it. [16] When McCarthy s arrived at the site on September 7, they discovered that the disassembling of the swing stage had not been done. The swing stage and the outriggers were still in place. McCarthy s went ahead and dismantled the equipment and proceeded with the roofing work. Once finished, McCarthy s did not re-assemble the swing stage and left it in a disconnected state. (Crown brief, page 5; Photographs 0664 and 0665) The Allegations relating to Counts 1 and 2 [17] The Crown alleges that McCarthy s Roofing should not have disassembled the swing stage and that having done so, should have communicated that fact. These allegations are expressed as follows in the Crown s Brief: None of the employees of McCarthy s present on September 7 were trained or authorized to interfere with the work-platform. McCarthy s did not communicate to AECON or anyone else that they had disassembled the work-platform. McCarthy s did not tag-out the work-platform, or otherwise inform anyone intending to use the work-platform of the fact the outriggers were no longer secured by ties or counter-weights. (Crown Brief, page 5, paragraphs 19 21) Why the Defence says Particulars are Needed [18] McCarthy s complains that neither Count 1 nor the disclosure tells it what the Crown will be seeking to establish it failed to do to ensure the safety of Mr. Conrod. Mr. Proctor says his review of the disclosure identified for him a broad range of possible allegations. He enumerated these as being allegations that McCarthy s failed to comply with the legislation by: Dismantling devices when they weren t qualified to do so; Not leaving counter-weights on the parapet;

6 6 Not doing an end-of-day check; Not doing a pre- or post-hazard inspection; Not disconnecting the power and wire-ropes that should have been removed from the swing stage; Not tagging-out the swing stage so that other parties would know it was not in use; Not barricading the swing-stage; Not inspecting the swing stage prior to someone starting it up; and Not properly training or supervising its employees. [19] As for Count 2, it is Mr. Proctor s submission that what communication was required and to whom needs to be particularized so that McCarthy s will know whether it is defending against a charge that it should have tagged-out the disabled swing stage or, more broadly, was responsible for ensuring that there was communication about the swing stage with Dalhousie, Aecon and Flynn. [20] Mr. Proctor acknowledged that were McCarthy s to be surprised by any evidence advanced by the Crown at trial it could seek an adjournment. However he submits an adjournment will not be an adequate or satisfactory remedy. Fairness demands a particularization of what McCarthy s should or should not have done. The Issues [21] I see three issues to be addressed in these reasons: 1) Whether the law requires that a count in an Information, standing alone and without more, must contain sufficient information for McCarthy s to know the case it must meet; 2) Whether the disclosure can be taken into account in determining an application for particulars; and 3) Whether, if disclosure can be taken into account, the disclosure in this case is sufficient to ensure that McCarthy s is able to make full answer and defence without the need for particularization of the general duty counts.

7 7 Issues #1 and #2 Does a Count in an Information, Standing Alone, Have to Contain Sufficient Information or Can the Disclosure Be Taken into Account on an Application for Particulars? [22] McCarthy s application for particulars relies on the golden rule that an accused is entitled to be reasonably informed of the offence alleged against him, in order to make a full defence and have a fair trial. (R. v. Côté, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 8, page 5 (Quicklaw version)) McCarthy s has also referred me to section 581 (3) of the Criminal Code and section 11(a) of the Charter. [23] Section 581(3) of the Criminal Code states: A count shall contain sufficient detail of the circumstances of the alleged offence to give to the accused reasonable information with respect to the act or omission to be proved against him and to identify the transaction referred to [24] Section 11(a) of the Charter states: Any person charged with an offence has the right to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specific offence. [25] As I will be discussing, in McCarthy s submission, the golden rule requires that a count in an Information standing alone and without more must contain sufficient information for an accused to know the case it must meet. [26] The often-cited R. v. Canadian General Electric Co., mentioned earlier in these reasons, appears to reflect this strict application of the golden rule. Canadian General Electric Co. was a pre-stinchcombe, pre-charter case where particulars were ordered in the absence of any disclosure being before the court. The allegations under the Combines Investigation Act dated back 7 to 15 years. All the court had was the indictment which did not do much more by way of giving information than using the words of the statute. (paragraph 37) [27] McCarthy s provided some more recent cases that, ostensibly asserting a strict application of the golden rule, ordered particulars. I will be discussing R. v. Savanna Drilling Corp., [2011] A.J. No. 555 (P.C.), R. v. I.G.L. Canada (Western) Ltd., [2007] A.J. No (P.C.) and the Alberta Queen s Bench decision in R. v. Rose s Well Services Ltd. (c.o.b. as Dial Oilfield Services), [2009] A.J. No. 7

8 8 (Q.B.) ( Dial ). These cases have been offered by McCarthy s in support of a strict count-standing-alone application of the golden rule. However, I have concluded that the reasoning in these decisions reaches beyond a strict focus on the wording of the charges. [28] The Crown has referred me to cases where particulars were denied, including the Alberta Provincial Court decision in Dial that went on appeal to the Queen s Bench. The Crown also relies on several other decisions, R. v. Violette, [2008] B.C.J. No (S.C.), R. v. Shalala, [2000] N.B. J. No. 14 (C.A.) (leave to appeal dismissed [2000] S.C.C.A. No. 133), R. v. Steve s Oilfield Services Ltd., [2006] A.J. No. 536 (P.C.), and one of my own - R. v. Atlantic Towing Ltd., [2010] N.S.J. No [29] The same Provincial Court judge who dismissed the application for particulars in Steve s Oilfield Services denied particulars in Dial. The Crown relies on these Provincial Court decisions in Dial and Steve s Oilfield and McCarthy s relies on what the Alberta Court of Queen s Bench had to say about the Dial case on appeal. R. v. Savanna and R. v. I.G.L. Canada (Western) Ltd. [30] An iteration of the golden rule that a count standing alone must provide sufficient information for an accused to understand what it is alleged to have done or omitted to do is expressed in both the Savanna and I.G.L. Canada decisions of the Alberta Provincial Court. The judges in both cases were dealing with general duty offences under the provincial occupational health and safety legislation. I.G.L. Canada is explicit at paragraph 44: The rule does not state that a Count is sufficient if Crown disclosure contains certain statements of fact which if incorporated into or read with an articulated Count disclosed acts which might conflate with the words of the Count and thereby give an accused notice of the transaction alleged against the accused. [31] In I.G.L. Canada particulars were ordered to prevent the Crown from being able to fix on any event that might emerge in the evidence to establish liability for the general duty offence. The Crown was ordered to provide particulars of

9 9 the specific failure or failures which are alleged against I.G.L. in Count 1. (paragraphs 45 and 46) [32] Despite the apparently clear statement at paragraph 44 of I.G.L. Canada that the golden rule requires the charge itself to provide sufficient information to an accused, at paragraph 34, the court held that particulars should be ordered if particulars beyond Crown disclosure are required to enable an accused to know the case to meet. (emphasis added) This is not a strict count-standing-alone application of the golden rule. [33] The later decision of Savanna notes the court s discretion to order particulars if it is necessary in order to ensure a fair trial and the [accused] is prejudiced in its defence by the lack of particulars. (paragraph 2) The court seems to adopt a strict golden rule approach, although like I.G.L. Canada, a full reading of the decision reveals that Crown disclosure was a relevant consideration. [34] Savanna took the same strong golden rule stance as I.G.L. Canada in its statement that Count 1 standing alone does not contain sufficient information to reasonably inform the Applicant of the transaction alleged against him. (paragraph 6) Count 1 in Savanna was a general duty offence. The Provincial Court in Savanna, finding support in the decisions in R. v. Ledcor Industries Ltd., [2004] A.J. No. 909 (P.C.) and I.G.L. Canada, held that particulars were required to reasonably inform the accused as to what failure is alleged against it. (paragraph 6) [35] The court in Savanna also drew support for its decision to order particulars from the Alberta Court of Queen s Bench decision in Dial where it was held that particulars should have been ordered by the court below. In Dial, the Queen s Bench identified various ways that particulars could have been provided: by having the Crown adopt the failures in the other counts, or adopt the allegations contained in the report, or provide particulars of the incident leading to the charge. (Dial, paragraph 56, cited in R. v. Savanna, paragraph 7) Although the Queen s Bench found the denial of particulars had not prejudiced Dial, it took the position that an order for particulars should have been made in the first instance, stating: the Crown should have been committed to a position. (Dial, paragraph 56)

10 10 [36] Savanna noted the Provincial Court decisions in Dial and R. v. Steve s Oilfield Services where particulars were denied in the context of general duty offences. Peterson, A.C.J. in Savanna commented on the reasoning of his colleague, Judge Pahl, in the two cases: His decisions in those cases turned on his finding that Crown s disclosure of the worker safety reports prepared as part of the investigation of the incidents provided sufficient detail of the specific failures alleged against the accused so as to render it unnecessary to require the Crown to supply particulars in order to protect the fairness of the trial. (paragraph 8) [37] What follows in the next paragraph of the Savanna decision suggests to me that even in these cases that purport to espouse a strict application of the golden rule, Crown disclosure was an influential factor on the issue of whether particulars were required. Peterson, A.C.J. went on to say: It appears to me that a common thread in all of those decisions is the notion that something more than the bare allegation of the general duty offence is necessary in order for the accused to be reasonably informed of the transaction alleged against him. Sometimes that something more is in the cumulative effect of the further counts alleging specific regulatory offences. Sometimes the something more is in the adequacy of the disclosure material as per [the decisions of Judge Pahl in Dial and Steve s Oilfield Services] (paragraph 9, emphasis added) Conclusion on Issues #1 and #2 [38] My examination of the cases I have just discussed leads me to conclude that an iteration of the golden rule requiring that a count standing alone and without more must provide sufficient information to an accused has not been applied in an absolute fashion. [39] It is clear that courts take disclosure into account in assessing whether the accused can make a full answer and defence and have a fair trial. This was explicitly the case in R. v. Violette and R. v. Shalala, two cases provided to me by the Crown.

11 11 [40] I am also satisfied that neither section 581(3) of the Criminal Code nor section 11(a) of the Charter require me to ignore, in assessing McCarthy s application for particulars, the disclosure that has been provided by the Crown. I find it appropriate here to consider whether, taking the Crown disclosure into account, McCarthy s has what it needs to make a full answer and defence and have a fair trial. I reject any suggestion that the general duty charges on their own have to supply the defendant with everything it requires. Issue #3 Is the disclosure in this case sufficient to ensure that McCarthy s is able to make full answer and defence without the need for particularization of the general duty counts? [41] My analysis of this third issue has led me to reach different conclusions in relation to Count 1 and Count 2. [42] The Crown is prosecuting McCarthy s under Count 1 for failing to take every precaution to ensure the health and safety of Christopher Conrod. In the Crown s submission the case is straight-forward and can be easily discerned from the disclosure. In oral submissions Mr. Keaveny articulated the Crown s focus: McCarthy s should never have disassembled the swing stage and having done so, they should have taken reasonable precautions to ensure that no worker at the site would be hurt as a result of the swing stage being dismantled. [43] I am not persuaded that McCarthy s risks being broad-sided by an infinite range of allegations, such as suggested by Mr. Proctor from his review of the disclosure as described in paragraph 18 of these reasons. The disclosure indicates to me a focused prosecution that will seek to draw a direct line between the dismantling of the swing stage and Mr. Conrod s accident. [44] I agree with the Crown that the disclosure explicitly reveals for the purposes of Count 1 what McCarthy s is alleged to have done or failed to do. In addition to the disclosure, Counts 3 and 4 serve as useful signposts. There is nothing obscure about the case McCarthy s is facing in relation to Count 1. The legal issues associated with Count 1 and the evidentiary basis for this general duty charge are not complex, confusing or vague. I am satisfied that McCarthy s fair trial rights are not in jeopardy and it will be able to make a full answer and defence on the basis of the information it has without any particularization of Count 1.

12 12 [45] I have come to a different conclusion in my assessment of the request for particulars in relation to Count 2. Count 2 is very broadly stated, alleging that McCarthy s failed to ensure communication between the employers and selfemployed persons at the project of information necessary to the health and safety of persons at the project I do not see in the disclosure a specific enough characterization of the communications that the Crown is alleging McCarthy s was responsible for making. Particulars would clarify to whom the Crown says McCarthy s should have communicated, and how and what it should have communicated. Clarifying this will better position McCarthy s to respond to the case alleged against it and make a full answer and defence. The prosecution of the Crown s case will not be unreasonably restricted. An order for particulars in relation to Count 2 will however ensure that McCarthy s fair trial rights are protected. Conclusion [46] On the basis of these reasons I am making no order for particulars in relation to Count 1. I am ordering the Crown to provide McCarthy s with particulars for Count 2.

IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R v. Robichaud, 2008 NSPC 51 HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN. - versus - PHILLIP ROBICHAUD

IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R v. Robichaud, 2008 NSPC 51 HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN. - versus - PHILLIP ROBICHAUD Editors note: Erratum released September 25, 2008.Original judgment has been corrected, with text of Erratum appended. IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R v. Robichaud, 2008 NSPC 51 Date:

More information

In the Court of Appeal of Alberta

In the Court of Appeal of Alberta In the Court of Appeal of Alberta Citation: R v Precision Diversified Oilfield Services Corp, 2017 ABCA 47 Between: Her Majesty the Queen Date: 20170208 Docket: 1603-0251-A Registry: Edmonton Applicant

More information

R. v. LORNA BOURGET 2007 NWTTC 13 File: T-01-CR IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN.

R. v. LORNA BOURGET 2007 NWTTC 13 File: T-01-CR IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN. R. v. LORNA BOURGET 2007 NWTTC 13 File: T-01-CR-2007000630 IN THE TERRITORIAL COURT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES IN THE MATTER OF: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN - and - LORNA BOURGET Applicant REASONS FOR DECISION

More information

MEMORANDUM TO COUNCIL

MEMORANDUM TO COUNCIL MEMORANDUM TO COUNCIL From: Lawrence Rubin Date: March 23, 2018 Subject: Professional Standards (Criminal) Committee Standard No. 3: Defence Obligations Regarding Disclosure FOR: APPROVAL INTRODUCTION

More information

Inaction in the Face of Serious Safety Risk Amounts to Criminal Negligence for Metron Supervisor

Inaction in the Face of Serious Safety Risk Amounts to Criminal Negligence for Metron Supervisor OHS & Workers Compensation Commentary for Management OCTOBER 13, 2015 Inaction in the Face of Serious Safety Risk Amounts to Criminal Negligence for Metron Supervisor Authors: Jeremy Warning and Cheryl

More information

ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE

ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE COURT FILE No.: Toronto Region, Metro North Court DATE: 2009 02 24 Citation: R. v. Gubins, 2009 ONCJ 80 ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AND MELISSA GUBINS Before Justice Leslie

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Bruhm, 2018 NSSC 295. v. Austin James Douglas Bruhm. Voir Dire Decision

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Bruhm, 2018 NSSC 295. v. Austin James Douglas Bruhm. Voir Dire Decision SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Bruhm, 2018 NSSC 295 Date: 20181121 Docket: CRBW473972 Registry: Bridgewater Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Austin James Douglas Bruhm Restriction on Publication

More information

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. MacIntosh, 2018 NSPC 23. v. Emily Anne MacIntosh DECISION REGARDING ADJOURNMENT

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. MacIntosh, 2018 NSPC 23. v. Emily Anne MacIntosh DECISION REGARDING ADJOURNMENT PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. MacIntosh, 2018 NSPC 23 Date: 2018-07-19 Docket: 8189240 Registry: Pictou Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Emily Anne MacIntosh DECISION REGARDING ADJOURNMENT

More information

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Longaphy, 2017 NSPC 67. v. Christopher Longaphy. Section 11(B) Charter - Decision - Unreasonable Delay

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Longaphy, 2017 NSPC 67. v. Christopher Longaphy. Section 11(B) Charter - Decision - Unreasonable Delay PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Longaphy, 2017 NSPC 67 Date: 2017-11-21 Docket: 2668787, 2668788, 2668789, 2668790 Registry: Dartmouth Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Christopher Longaphy

More information

Occupational Health and Safety Act

Occupational Health and Safety Act Occupational Health and Safety Act CHAPTER 7 OF THE ACTS OF 1996 as amended by 2000, c. 28, ss. 86, 87; 2004, c. 6, s. 24; 2007, c. 14, s. 7; 2009, c. 24; 2010, c. 37, ss. 117-126; 2010, c. 66; 2011, c.

More information

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. MacLean, 2015 NSPC 70. v. Nathan Fred Grant MacLean SENTENCING DECISION

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. MacLean, 2015 NSPC 70. v. Nathan Fred Grant MacLean SENTENCING DECISION PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. MacLean, 2015 NSPC 70 Date: 2015-10-15 Docket: 2825618 Registry: Pictou Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Nathan Fred Grant MacLean SENTENCING DECISION Restriction

More information

PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN LESLIE CAMERON KING

PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN LESLIE CAMERON KING PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION Citation: R. v. King 2008 PESCTD 18 Date: 20080325 Docket: S1-GC-572 Registry: Charlottetown BETWEEN: AND: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN LESLIE

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Maxwell Properties Ltd. v. Mosaik Property Management Ltd., 2017 NSSC 81

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Maxwell Properties Ltd. v. Mosaik Property Management Ltd., 2017 NSSC 81 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Maxwell Properties Ltd. v. Mosaik Property Management Ltd., 2017 NSSC 81 Date: 20170316 Docket: Hfx No. 458069 Registry: Halifax Between: Maxwell Properties Limited

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Pike, 2018 NSSC 38. Jeremy Pike. v. Her Majesty the Queen

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Pike, 2018 NSSC 38. Jeremy Pike. v. Her Majesty the Queen SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Pike, 2018 NSSC 38 Date: 20180214 Docket: CRPH. No. 470108 Registry: Port Hawkesbury Between: Jeremy Pike v. Her Majesty the Queen Applicant Respondent Judge:

More information

CRIMINAL LAW PROFESSIONAL STANDARD #2

CRIMINAL LAW PROFESSIONAL STANDARD #2 CRIMINAL LAW PROFESSIONAL STANDARD #2 NAME OF STANDARD A GUILTY PLEA Brief Description of Standard: A standard on the steps to be taken by counsel before entering a guilty plea on behalf of a client. Committee

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Date: 20040316 Docket: X066101 Registry: New Westminster IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Oral Ruling The Honourable Mr. Justice Williams March 16, 2004 HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AGAINST JEREMY WADE

More information

Safety Codes Council

Safety Codes Council Safety Codes Council 2017 Conference and AGM Presented by: Michael S. Solowan Partner 1 R v Williams Engineering Canada Inc. Alberta Provincial Court, 2014 Rocky Mountain Court Building in Calgary 2 Recap

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Doucette v. Nova Scotia, 2016 NSSC 78

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Doucette v. Nova Scotia, 2016 NSSC 78 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Doucette v. Nova Scotia, 2016 NSSC 78 Date: 2016-03-24 Docket: Hfx No. 412065 Registry: Halifax Between: Laura Doucette Plaintiff v. Her Majesty in right of the Province

More information

REPORT FI-04-30(M) PART XX OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT - FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY. Darce Fardy

REPORT FI-04-30(M) PART XX OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT - FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY. Darce Fardy REPORT FI-04-30(M) PART XX OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT - FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY A REQUEST FOR REVIEW of a decision of the HALIFAX REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY to deny access to parts

More information

Alberta (Attorney General) v. Krushell, 2003 ABQB 252 Date: Action No

Alberta (Attorney General) v. Krushell, 2003 ABQB 252 Date: Action No Alberta (Attorney General) v. Krushell, 2003 ABQB 252 Date: 20030318 Action No. 0203 19075 IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF ALBERTA JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF EDMONTON IN THE MATTER OF the Freedom of Information

More information

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Fleet, 2015 NSPC 92. v. David Richard K. Fleet. Decision on Voir Dire

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Fleet, 2015 NSPC 92. v. David Richard K. Fleet. Decision on Voir Dire PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Fleet, 2015 NSPC 92 Date: 20151021 Docket: 2793474, 2793475 & 2793476 Registry: Dartmouth Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. David Richard K. Fleet Decision

More information

If you wish to understand it further, please consult my more detailed and articulated analysis.

If you wish to understand it further, please consult my more detailed and articulated analysis. Greetings! and thank you for consulting my legal self-defence kit. Print a copy It is free of charge, but it comes with instructions and warnings and advice. Equipment required: a printer with paper, a

More information

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE FEDERAL CROWN

A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE FEDERAL CROWN A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE FEDERAL CROWN Martin C.Ward Introduction: The Crown could not be sued at common law. The Courts were creations of the Crown and as such it could not be compelled

More information

ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F January 12, 2017 ALBERTA HEALTH SERVICES. Case File Number F8441

ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F January 12, 2017 ALBERTA HEALTH SERVICES. Case File Number F8441 ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F2017-01 January 12, 2017 ALBERTA HEALTH SERVICES Case File Number F8441 Office URL: www.oipc.ab.ca Summary: Pursuant to the Freedom of

More information

HOME INVASIONS FIRST ISSUED: APRIL 3, 2000 LAST SUBSTANTIVE REVISION: APRIL 3, 2000

HOME INVASIONS FIRST ISSUED: APRIL 3, 2000 LAST SUBSTANTIVE REVISION: APRIL 3, 2000 DOCUMENT TITLE: HOME INVASIONS NATURE OF DOCUMENT: AG DIRECTIVE FIRST ISSUED: APRIL 3, 2000 LAST SUBSTANTIVE REVISION: APRIL 3, 2000 EDITED / DISTRIBUTED: SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 NOTE: THIS POLICY DOCUMENT IS

More information

Order F Ministry of Justice. Hamish Flanagan Adjudicator. March 18, 2015

Order F Ministry of Justice. Hamish Flanagan Adjudicator. March 18, 2015 Order F15-12 Ministry of Justice Hamish Flanagan Adjudicator March 18, 2015 CanLII Cite: 2015 BCIPC 12 Quicklaw Cite: [2015] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 12 Summary: The applicant requested records from the Ministry

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Certification Coating Specialists Inc. v. Halifax-Dartmouth Bridge Commission, 2016 NSSC 250

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Certification Coating Specialists Inc. v. Halifax-Dartmouth Bridge Commission, 2016 NSSC 250 Between: SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Certification Coating Specialists Inc. v. Halifax-Dartmouth Bridge Commission, 2016 NSSC 250 Date: 20160922 Docket: HFX450768 Registry: Halifax The Bowra

More information

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Benson, 2017 NSPC 37. v. George William Benson DECISION RE APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT CONVICITON

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Benson, 2017 NSPC 37. v. George William Benson DECISION RE APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT CONVICITON PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Benson, 2017 NSPC 37 Date: 2017-07-24 Docket: 8091400 Registry: Pictou Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. George William Benson DECISION RE APPLICATION TO

More information

Decision F07-03 MINISTRY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner. June 22, 2007

Decision F07-03 MINISTRY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner. June 22, 2007 Decision F07-03 MINISTRY OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner June 22, 2007 Quicklaw Cite: [2007] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 14 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/other_decisions/decisionfo7-03.pdf

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Wamboldt Estate v. Wamboldt, 2017 NSSC 288

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Wamboldt Estate v. Wamboldt, 2017 NSSC 288 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Wamboldt Estate v. Wamboldt, 2017 NSSC 288 Date: 20171107 Docket: Bwt No. 459126 Registry: Bridgewater Between: Michael Dockrill, in his capacity as the executor

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA IN BANKRUPTCY & INSOLVENCY Citation: Royal Bank of Canada v. 2M Farms Ltd., 2017 NSSC 235

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA IN BANKRUPTCY & INSOLVENCY Citation: Royal Bank of Canada v. 2M Farms Ltd., 2017 NSSC 235 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA IN BANKRUPTCY & INSOLVENCY Citation: Royal Bank of Canada v. 2M Farms Ltd., 2017 NSSC 235 Date: 20170906 Docket: Hfx No. 425907 Registry: Halifax Between: Royal Bank of Canada

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Meredith (Re), 2018 NSSC 153. In the Matter of the Bankruptcy of Griffith Thomas Meredith DECISION

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Meredith (Re), 2018 NSSC 153. In the Matter of the Bankruptcy of Griffith Thomas Meredith DECISION SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Meredith (Re), 2018 NSSC 153 Date: 20180612 Docket: Halifax, No. 471584; B-41715 Registry: Halifax In the Matter of the Bankruptcy of Griffith Thomas Meredith DECISION

More information

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Hatt, 2017 NSCA 36. Her Majesty the Queen

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Hatt, 2017 NSCA 36. Her Majesty the Queen NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Hatt, 2017 NSCA 36 Date: 20170509 Docket: CAC 457828 Registry: Halifax Between: Richard Edward Hatt v. Her Majesty the Queen Appellant Respondent Judge: Appeal

More information

Hazardous Products Act

Hazardous Products Act 1-1 HPA Section 1 - Short Title Hazardous Products Act An Act to prohibit the advertising, sale and importation of hazardous products. Short Title 1. This Act may be cited as the Hazardous Products Act,

More information

EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICES ACT

EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICES ACT Province of Alberta Statutes of Alberta, Current as of December 15, 2017 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen s Printer Suite 700, Park Plaza 10611-98 Avenue Edmonton,

More information

Case Name: Hunter v. Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Case Name: Hunter v. Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Page 1 Case Name: Hunter v. Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Between Ralph Hunter, Plaintiff, and The Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Bonnie Bishop,

More information

Bill C-337 Judicial Accountability through Sexual Assault Law Training Act

Bill C-337 Judicial Accountability through Sexual Assault Law Training Act Bill C-337 Judicial Accountability through Sexual Assault Law Training Act CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION CRIMINAL JUSTICE SECTION April 2017 500-865 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1S 5S8 tel/tél : 613.237.2925

More information

Author & Presenter: Deon Louw Pr.Eng. BSc.Eng. Deputy Director: Infrastructure & Planning Electricity Services

Author & Presenter: Deon Louw Pr.Eng. BSc.Eng. Deputy Director: Infrastructure & Planning Electricity Services 1 SWITCHING OFF DANGEROUS ELECTRICITY CIRCUITRY IN TERMS OF THE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT (OHSA) VS CONSTRAINTS OF SWITCHING OFF SERVICES IN TERMS OF THE PROMOTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE ACT

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: West Vancouver Police Department v. British Columbia (Information and Privacy Commissioner), 2016 BCSC 934 Date: 20160525 Docket: S152619 Registry: Vancouver

More information

REGULATION VARIANCES OR EXEMPTIONS

REGULATION VARIANCES OR EXEMPTIONS REGULATION VARIANCES OR EXEMPTIONS Follow-up Report #3 submitted to the ROYAL COMMISSION ON WORKERS COMPENSATION IN BRITISH COLUMBIA Prepared by the OHS Legislation Research Team (Legal Consultants) being:

More information

DISCLOSURE: THE LEGAL AND ETHICAL REQUIREMENTS IN PROFESSIONAL DISCIPLINE CASES. Andrew J. Heal

DISCLOSURE: THE LEGAL AND ETHICAL REQUIREMENTS IN PROFESSIONAL DISCIPLINE CASES. Andrew J. Heal DISCLOSURE: THE LEGAL AND ETHICAL REQUIREMENTS IN PROFESSIONAL DISCIPLINE CASES Andrew J. Heal ANDREW J. HEAL, PARTNER HEAL & Co. LLP - 2 - DISCLOSURE: THE LEGAL AND ETHICAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROSECUTION

More information

5.9 PRIVATE PROSECUTIONS

5.9 PRIVATE PROSECUTIONS OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS GUIDELINE OF THE DIRECTOR ISSUED UNDER SECTION 3(3)(c) OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS ACT March 1, 2014 -2- TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION... 2

More information

I Done What He Told Me To What to Do (And Not to Do) When the Regulator Calls

I Done What He Told Me To What to Do (And Not to Do) When the Regulator Calls ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: MANAGING RISK PAPER 3.1 I Done What He Told Me To What to Do (And Not to Do) When the Regulator Calls These materials were prepared by Toby Kruger and Clifford G. Proudfoot, both of

More information

REVIEW REPORT FI December 29, 2015 Department of Finance

REVIEW REPORT FI December 29, 2015 Department of Finance Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for Nova Scotia Report of the Commissioner (Review Officer) Catherine Tully REVIEW REPORT FI-13-28 December 29, 2015 Department of Finance Summary: The

More information

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT Province of Alberta OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT Revised Statutes of Alberta 2000 Current as of October 1, 2013 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen s Printer 5

More information

PERSONAL INFORMATION PROTECTION ACT

PERSONAL INFORMATION PROTECTION ACT Province of Alberta Statutes of Alberta, Current as of December 17, 2014 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen s Printer Suite 700, Park Plaza 10611-98 Avenue Edmonton,

More information

A CLASS ACTION BLUEPRINT FOR ALBERTA

A CLASS ACTION BLUEPRINT FOR ALBERTA A CLASS ACTION BLUEPRINT FOR ALBERTA By William E. McNally and Barbara E. Cotton 1 2 Interesting things have been happening in Alberta recently regarding class action proceedings. Alberta is handicapped

More information

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Reeve, 2018 NSPC 30. v. Sherri Reeve DECISION RE: JURISDICTION OF PROVINCIAL COURT

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Reeve, 2018 NSPC 30. v. Sherri Reeve DECISION RE: JURISDICTION OF PROVINCIAL COURT PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Reeve, 2018 NSPC 30 Date: 20180831 Docket: 2793700 & 2793703 Registry: Dartmouth Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Sherri Reeve DECISION RE: JURISDICTION

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Smith, 2017 NSSC 122. v. Tyrico Thomas Smith

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Smith, 2017 NSSC 122. v. Tyrico Thomas Smith SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Smith, 2017 NSSC 122 Date: 20170509 Docket: Cr. No. 449182 Registry: Halifax Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Tyrico Thomas Smith Judge: Heard: Sentencing

More information

Third Party Records Disclosure Applications s. 278 Criminal Code. D. Brian Newton, Q.C.

Third Party Records Disclosure Applications s. 278 Criminal Code. D. Brian Newton, Q.C. Third Party Records Disclosure Applications s. 278 Criminal Code D. Brian Newton, Q.C. Preamble Several years ago, I was approached by Victim Services of the Department of Justice in regards to providing

More information

Québec Superior Court finds breach of OHSA can support committal to trial on manslaughter charge under Criminal Code

Québec Superior Court finds breach of OHSA can support committal to trial on manslaughter charge under Criminal Code Québec Superior Court finds breach of OHSA can support committal to trial on manslaughter charge under Criminal Code Date : November 23, 2016 The Québec Superior Court has just released (October 31) a

More information

OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION & PRIVACY COMMISSIONER for Prince Edward Island. Order No. FI Re: Department of Communities, Land and Environment

OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION & PRIVACY COMMISSIONER for Prince Edward Island. Order No. FI Re: Department of Communities, Land and Environment OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION & PRIVACY COMMISSIONER for Prince Edward Island Order No. FI-17-011 Re: Department of Communities, Land and Environment July 13, 2017 Prince Edward Island Information and Privacy

More information

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Spencer, 2018 NSCA 3. v. Her Majesty the Queen

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Spencer, 2018 NSCA 3. v. Her Majesty the Queen NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. Spencer, 2018 NSCA 3 Date: 20180109 Docket: CAC 470957 Registry: Halifax Between: Rita Mary Spencer v. Her Majesty the Queen Applicant Respondent Judge: Motion

More information

PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION. Against. Gerard Joseph MacDonald

PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION. Against. Gerard Joseph MacDonald PROVINCE OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND IN THE SUPREME COURT - TRIAL DIVISION Citation: R v. MacDonald 2007 PESCTD 29 Date: 20070820 Docket: S1 GC-556 Registry: Charlottetown Between Her Majesty the Queen Against

More information

BILL C-45: HAS THE SLEEPING GIANT AWAKENED TO BECOME AN EMPLOYER'S WORST NIGHTMARE?

BILL C-45: HAS THE SLEEPING GIANT AWAKENED TO BECOME AN EMPLOYER'S WORST NIGHTMARE? BILL C-45: HAS THE SLEEPING GIANT AWAKENED TO BECOME AN EMPLOYER'S WORST NIGHTMARE? By: Norm Keith * and Anna Abbott ± Bill C-45 (also known as the "Westray Bill") amended the Criminal Code, on March 31,

More information

To provide a continuum of innovative and cost effective legal services for people in need throughout Alberta.

To provide a continuum of innovative and cost effective legal services for people in need throughout Alberta. To provide a continuum of innovative and cost effective legal services for people in need throughout Alberta. Effective on Certificates Issued on or after November 1, 2009 Table of Contents Introduction...1

More information

Who s who in a Criminal Trial

Who s who in a Criminal Trial Mock Criminal Trial Scenario Who s who in a Criminal Trial ACCUSED The accused is the person who is alleged to have committed the criminal offence, and who has been charged with committing it. Before being

More information

ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F November 26, 2015 ALBERTA JUSTICE AND SOLICITOR GENERAL

ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F November 26, 2015 ALBERTA JUSTICE AND SOLICITOR GENERAL ALBERTA OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER ORDER F2015-34 November 26, 2015 ALBERTA JUSTICE AND SOLICITOR GENERAL Case File Number F6898 Office URL: www.oipc.ab.ca Summary: The Applicant

More information

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT J. WILSON, KARAKATSANIS, AND BRYANT JJ. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL COURT J. WILSON, KARAKATSANIS, AND BRYANT JJ. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Ministry of Attorney General and Toronto Star and Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario, 2010 ONSC 991 DIVISIONAL COURT FILE NO.: 34/09 DATE: 20100326 ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE DIVISIONAL

More information

Order F12-12 MINISTRY OF JUSTICE. Catherine Boies Parker, Adjudicator. August 23, 2012

Order F12-12 MINISTRY OF JUSTICE. Catherine Boies Parker, Adjudicator. August 23, 2012 Order F12-12 MINISTRY OF JUSTICE Catherine Boies Parker, Adjudicator August 23, 2012 Quicklaw Cite: [2012] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 17 CanLII Cite: 2012 BCIPC No. 17 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/2012/orderf12-12.pdf

More information

Order COLLEGE OF OPTICIANS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

Order COLLEGE OF OPTICIANS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Order 02-35 COLLEGE OF OPTICIANS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA David Loukidelis, Information and Privacy Commissioner July 16, 2002 Quicklaw Cite: [2002] B.C.I.P.C.D. No. 35 Document URL: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/orders/order02-35.pdf

More information

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. MacDonald, 2016 NSCA 27. Between: James Malcolm Russell MacDonald. v. Her Majesty the Queen

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. MacDonald, 2016 NSCA 27. Between: James Malcolm Russell MacDonald. v. Her Majesty the Queen NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. MacDonald, 2016 NSCA 27 Date: 20160420 Docket: CAC 435925 Registry: Halifax Between: James Malcolm Russell MacDonald v. Her Majesty the Queen Appellant Respondent

More information

YOUTH JUSTICE COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. M.A.C., 2018 NSPC 12. v. M.A.C.

YOUTH JUSTICE COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. M.A.C., 2018 NSPC 12. v. M.A.C. YOUTH JUSTICE COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. M.A.C., 2018 NSPC 12 Date: 2018-05-02 Docket: 8221262, 8221263 Registry: Pictou Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. M.A.C. Restriction on Publication: No

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Fawson Estate v. Deveau, 2015 NSSC 355

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Fawson Estate v. Deveau, 2015 NSSC 355 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Fawson Estate v. Deveau, 2015 NSSC 355 Date: 20150917 Docket: Hfx No. 412751 Registry: Halifax Between: James Robert Fawson, James Robert Fawson, as the personal

More information

2012 Bill 6. First Session, 28th Legislature, 61 Elizabeth II THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA BILL 6

2012 Bill 6. First Session, 28th Legislature, 61 Elizabeth II THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA BILL 6 2012 Bill 6 First Session, 28th Legislature, 61 Elizabeth II THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF ALBERTA BILL 6 PROTECTION AND COMPLIANCE STATUTES AMENDMENT ACT, 2012 MR. JENEROUX First Reading.......................................................

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Colpitts, 2017 NSSC 22. Robert Blois Colpitts. Her Majesty the Queen MID-TRIAL RULING TRIAL MANAGEMENT

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Colpitts, 2017 NSSC 22. Robert Blois Colpitts. Her Majesty the Queen MID-TRIAL RULING TRIAL MANAGEMENT SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Colpitts, 2017 NSSC 22 Date: 20170124 Docket: CRH 346068 Registry: Halifax Between: Robert Blois Colpitts v. Her Majesty the Queen MID-TRIAL RULING TRIAL MANAGEMENT

More information

2ND SESSION, 41ST LEGISLATURE, ONTARIO 67 ELIZABETH II, Bill 203. An Act respecting transparency of pay in employment

2ND SESSION, 41ST LEGISLATURE, ONTARIO 67 ELIZABETH II, Bill 203. An Act respecting transparency of pay in employment 2ND SESSION, 41ST LEGISLATURE, ONTARIO 67 ELIZABETH II, 2018 Bill 203 An Act respecting transparency of pay in employment The Hon. K. Flynn Minister of Labour Government Bill 1st Reading March 6, 2018

More information

SUPREME COURT OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND. Her Majesty the Queen. and. Christopher Raymond O Halloran. Before: The Honourable Justice Wayne D.

SUPREME COURT OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND. Her Majesty the Queen. and. Christopher Raymond O Halloran. Before: The Honourable Justice Wayne D. SUPREME COURT OF PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND Citation: R. v. O Halloran 2013 PESC 22 Date: 20131029 Docket: S2-GC-130 Registry: Summerside Her Majesty the Queen and Christopher Raymond O Halloran Before: The

More information

Issue #24- A Comparative Analysis of the Alibi Rule. Scott W. Niemisto

Issue #24- A Comparative Analysis of the Alibi Rule. Scott W. Niemisto Issue #24- A Comparative Analysis of the Alibi Rule Scott W. Niemisto TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Sources..iii Statement of the Issue.1 I. Introduction..1 II. Comparative Legal Analysis of the Alibi Rule.3

More information

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT NO 85 OF 1993

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT NO 85 OF 1993 REVISION No.: 0 Page 1 of 23 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT NO 85 OF 1993 CONTENTS CLICK ON PAGE NUMBER TO GO TO SECTION OR REGULATION AND USE WEB TOOLBAR TO NAVIGATE Pre-amble 3 Section 7 3 Section

More information

North Bay (City) v. Vaughan, [2018] O.J. No. 1809

North Bay (City) v. Vaughan, [2018] O.J. No. 1809 Ontario Judgments Ontario Court of Appeal D.M. Brown J.A. Heard: March 19, 2018. Judgment: March 28, 2018. Docket: M48246 [2018] O.J. No. 1809 2018 ONCA 319 Between The Corporation of the City of North

More information

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bertram v. Fundy Tidal Inc., 2018 NSSC 165

SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bertram v. Fundy Tidal Inc., 2018 NSSC 165 SUPREME COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: Bertram v. Fundy Tidal Inc., 2018 NSSC 165 Date: 20180510 Docket: Yar No. 461282 Registry: Halifax Between: J. Douglas Bertram, J. Scott Bertram, Marc Blinn and Alan

More information

The Gas Inspection Act, 1993

The Gas Inspection Act, 1993 1 GAS INSPECTION, 1993 c. G-3.2 The Gas Inspection Act, 1993 being Chapter G-3.2 of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1993, (effective May 21, 1993) as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1996, c.9; 1998,

More information

SECURITY SERVICES AND INVESTIGATORS ACT

SECURITY SERVICES AND INVESTIGATORS ACT Province of Alberta Statutes of Alberta, Current as of January 1, 2017 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen s Printer 7 th Floor, Park Plaza 10611-98 Avenue Edmonton,

More information

Defending Yourself. Assault. Defending yourself. Defending yourself. Defending yourself. Defending yourself. September 2015

Defending Yourself. Assault. Defending yourself. Defending yourself. Defending yourself. Defending yourself. September 2015 Defending Yourself Assault September 2015 Defending yourself Defending yourself Defending yourself Defending yourself July 2012 After you ve been charged: A step-by-step chart The flowchart under this

More information

PUBLICATION BANS FIRST ISSUED: NOVEMBER 23, 2015 EDITED / DISTRIBUTED: NOVEMBER 23, 2015

PUBLICATION BANS FIRST ISSUED: NOVEMBER 23, 2015 EDITED / DISTRIBUTED: NOVEMBER 23, 2015 DOCUMENT TITLE: PUBLICATION BANS NATURE OF DOCUMENT: PRACTICE NOTE FIRST ISSUED: NOVEMBER 23, 2015 LAST SUBSTANTIVE REVISION: EDITED / DISTRIBUTED: NOVEMBER 23, 2015 NOTE: THIS POICY DOCUMENT IS TO BE

More information

SKIN CANCER PREVENTION (ARTIFICIAL TANNING) ACT

SKIN CANCER PREVENTION (ARTIFICIAL TANNING) ACT Province of Alberta SKIN CANCER PREVENTION (ARTIFICIAL Statutes of Alberta, Current as of January 1, 2018 Office Consolidation Published by Alberta Queen s Printer Alberta Queen s Printer Suite 700, Park

More information

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF MANITOBA

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF MANITOBA On review from a decision of Provincial Court Judge, July 24, 2018 Date: 20190204 Docket: CR 18-15-00824 (Thompson Centre) Indexed as: R. v. Kelly-White Cited as: 2019 MBQB 22 COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH OF

More information

Roster Lawyers Tariff of Fees

Roster Lawyers Tariff of Fees Roster Lawyers Tariff of Fees December 7, 2015 Schedule 2 Roster Lawyers Tariff of Fees Table of Contents 1. Criminal Certificates 20 2. Criminal Appeal Certificates 27 3. Civil Certificates 30 4. Administrative

More information

Good Faith and Honesty: Bhasin v Hrynew

Good Faith and Honesty: Bhasin v Hrynew Good Faith and Honesty: Bhasin v Hrynew June 9, 2015 Toronto, Ontario Marc Kestenberg, Partner, Norton Rose Fulbright Canada LLP Marlo Kravetsky, Senior Counsel, TD Bank Group Deborah Reine, Senior Counsel,

More information

PRACTICE DIRECTIVE I Preliminary Inquiry. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada regarding Preliminary Inquiries came into force on June 1, 2004.

PRACTICE DIRECTIVE I Preliminary Inquiry. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada regarding Preliminary Inquiries came into force on June 1, 2004. PRACTICE DIRECTIVE I Preliminary Inquiry Amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada regarding Preliminary Inquiries came into force on June 1, 2004. Statutory Provisions: Criminal Code - Part XVIII 1. No

More information

CANADIAN JUDICIAL COUNCIL

CANADIAN JUDICIAL COUNCIL CANADIAN JUDICIAL COUNCIL IN THE MATTER OF AN INVESTIGATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 63(2) OF THE JUDGES ACT REGARDING THE HONOURABLE ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE LORI DOUGLAS DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2014 REASONS OF

More information

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Bowser, 2016 NSPC 34. Her Majesty the Queen v. Joseph Wayne Bowser and Ricky Daniel Cameron

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Bowser, 2016 NSPC 34. Her Majesty the Queen v. Joseph Wayne Bowser and Ricky Daniel Cameron PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Bowser, 2016 NSPC 34 Between: Date: April 14, 2016 Docket: 2379172-73, 2379175-76 Registry: Dartmouth Her Majesty the Queen v. Joseph Wayne Bowser and Ricky

More information

Bill C-2: Highlights and Issues

Bill C-2: Highlights and Issues Nova Scotia Fall Criminal Law Conference Bill C-2: Highlights and Issues Halifax, Nova Scotia November 21, 2008 Philip Perlmutter Counsel - Crown Law Office Criminal Overview: This paper highlights some

More information

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: R. v. Punko, 2012 SCC 39 DATE: DOCKET: 34135, 34193

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA. CITATION: R. v. Punko, 2012 SCC 39 DATE: DOCKET: 34135, 34193 SUPREME COURT OF CANADA CITATION: R. v. Punko, 2012 SCC 39 DATE: 20120720 DOCKET: 34135, 34193 BETWEEN: AND BETWEEN: John Virgil Punko Appellant and Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Randall Richard Potts

More information

September 1, 2015 Le 1 er septembre 2015 DISCLOSURE

September 1, 2015 Le 1 er septembre 2015 DISCLOSURE OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL CABINET DU PROCUREUR GÉNÉRAL PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS OPERATIONAL MANUAL MANUEL DES OPÉRATIONS DE POURSUITES PUBLIQUES TYPE OF DOCUMENT TYPE DE DOCUMENT : Policy Politique CHAPTER

More information

Criminal Law. Protect people and property Maintain order Preserve standards of public decency

Criminal Law. Protect people and property Maintain order Preserve standards of public decency A Crime is any action or omission of an act that is prohibited and punishable by law. There are four conditions in which an action or omission becomes a crime: The act is considered a wrong for society.

More information

DECISION 2018 NSUARB 142 M08699 NOVA SCOTIA UTILITY AND REVIEW BOARD IN THE MATTER OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT. - and -

DECISION 2018 NSUARB 142 M08699 NOVA SCOTIA UTILITY AND REVIEW BOARD IN THE MATTER OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT. - and - DECISION 2018 NSUARB 142 M08699 NOVA SCOTIA UTILITY AND REVIEW BOARD IN THE MATTER OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT ACT - and - IN THE MATTER OF AN APPEAL by DAVID MACINNES from the Decision of Kings County

More information

Discrimination & Human Rights

Discrimination & Human Rights Discrimination & Human Rights January 1, 2014 http://www.dal.ca/faculty/law/dlas/public-legal-education.html Acknowledgement Dalhousie Legal Aid Service would like to gratefully acknowledge and thank the

More information

NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER

NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER March 20, 2009 A-2009-004 NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR OFFICE OF THE INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER REPORT A-2009-004 Eastern Regional Integrated Health Authority Summary: The Applicant applied under

More information

Submissions to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

Submissions to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration Submissions to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration By Justice for Children and Youth Regarding Bill C-6 An Act to Amend the Citizenship Act 8 April 2016 About Justice for Children and

More information

Fire SCO Group C Level 2 Skill 1: Scene Examination

Fire SCO Group C Level 2 Skill 1: Scene Examination Candidate Name STANDARD: NFPA 1033, 2014 Edition, 4.2 Scene Examination: 4.2.1 to 4.2.9 Also see NFPA 921 Appendix A for forms, logs and notes templates to be used during investigation. Local department

More information

PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS REGISTRATION ACT

PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS REGISTRATION ACT PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS REGISTRATION ACT Chapter P-26 Table of Contents Part 1 Registration 1 Definitions 2 Staff 3 Registrar 4 Register 5 Ineligibility for registration 6 Application

More information

DRAFT. The Prearranged Funeral Services Act Regulation

DRAFT. The Prearranged Funeral Services Act Regulation DRAFT The Prearranged Funeral Services Act Regulation July 2015 CONTENTS TITLE SECTION Definitions 1 Application for licence by funeral director 2 Licence renewal 3 Information to be kept up to date 4

More information

ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE

ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE CITATION: R. v. Live Nation Canada Inc., 2017 ONCJ 356 DATE: June 6, 2017 COURT FILE No.: Toronto B E T W E E N : HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Prosecutor) AND LIVE NATION CANADA INC.,

More information

A View From the Bench Administrative Law

A View From the Bench Administrative Law A View From the Bench Administrative Law Justice David Farrar Nova Scotia Court of Appeal With the Assistance of James Charlton, Law Clerk Nova Scotia Court of Appeal Court of Appeal for Ontario: Mavi

More information

1. The defendant, James Gauvin, is charged with two counts of uttering threats to kill a dog contrary to s (1)(c), two counts of killing an anim

1. The defendant, James Gauvin, is charged with two counts of uttering threats to kill a dog contrary to s (1)(c), two counts of killing an anim 2009 NBPC 29 R. v. James Alderice Gauvin CANADA File no: 19435301 IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF NEW BRUNSWICK JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MONCTON BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN - and - JAMES ALDERICE GAUVIN BEFORE:

More information

Constitutional Practice and Procedure in Administrative Tribunals: An Emerging Issue

Constitutional Practice and Procedure in Administrative Tribunals: An Emerging Issue Constitutional Practice and Procedure in Administrative Tribunals: An Emerging Issue David Stratas Introduction After much controversy, 1 the Supreme Court of Canada has confirmed that tribunals that have

More information

DRUNKENNESS AS A DEFENCE TO MURDER

DRUNKENNESS AS A DEFENCE TO MURDER Page 1 DRUNKENNESS AS A DEFENCE TO MURDER Criminal Law Conference 2005 Halifax, Nova Scotia Prepared by: Joel E. Pink, Q.C. Joel E. Pink, Q.C. & Associates 1583 Hollis Street, Ste 300 Halifax, NS B3J 2P8

More information

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. George, 2016 NSCA 88. Steven William George

NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. George, 2016 NSCA 88. Steven William George NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL Citation: R. v. George, 2016 NSCA 88 Date: 20161209 Docket: CAC 449452 Registry: Halifax Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Steven William George Appellant Respondent Judge:

More information