The appellant was convicted of manslaughter in the death of his pregnant wife who drowned in a bathtub.
He was charged with first degree murder but convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment.
On appeal, the appellant challenged his conviction on the ground that the trial judge misapprehended a jury question during deliberations and introduced a new theory of liability based on section 215 of the Criminal Code (failure to provide necessaries of life) that was not previously advanced at trial.
The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge's answer to the jury's question introduced an alternative route to conviction that was incompatible with how the trial had been conducted, thereby compromising trial fairness.
The court allowed the appeal and directed a new trial on the charge of manslaughter.
