C. Bendick

Following guilty pleas to thirteen counts of failing to comply with property standards and unsafe building orders relating to a rental apartment building, the court considered a joint submission on sentence.

Applying the Anthony-Cook public interest test in a regulatory sentencing context, the court accepted the proposed fines for eleven counts but rejected the proposed $75,000 fines for two counts involving dangerous balcony and parking garage conditions posing grave risk to life and permanent injury.

The court emphasized deterrence, denunciation, repeat offending, the corporation's broad economic activity, and the vulnerability of affected tenants.

Fines of $400,000 were substituted on the two unsafe-building counts, for a total fine of $950,000 plus victim fine surcharges and court administration fees.

In a Provincial Offences Act prosecution arising from alleged Building Code Act non-compliance, the defendant brought a disclosure motion seeking further municipal records said to support a defence relating to pre-existing structures and historic permits.

The court held that the Stinchcombe disclosure framework applies in POA matters, but the practical intensity of the analysis depends on the complexity and seriousness of the prosecution.

Applying the first-party versus third-party disclosure principles discussed in McGuigan, the court found the request was speculative and unsupported by a sufficient factual foundation showing that relevant undisclosed records existed in the prosecution's possession.

The motion for further first-party disclosure was dismissed, and the matter was directed to proceed to trial.