The appellant appealed convictions for failing to comply with an animal welfare order and challenged the dismissal of its Charter stay motion for abuse of process.
The appeal argued that the prosecution became abusive after the Ministry issued a revocation notice, and that the motion judge misinterpreted s. 30(5) of the governing statute and conflated the abuse-of-process inquiry with the stay analysis.
The court held that the offences had crystallized before the revocation, that the statutory scheme did not nullify prior non-compliance, and that the prosecution did not offend societal notions of fair play and decency.
Although the justice of the peace conflated aspects of the abuse and stay analyses, the appeal court found no reversible error and in any event applied the curative proviso under the Provincial Offences Act.
The appeal was dismissed.
