The appellants were charged with conspiracy to commit murder.
At their first trial, the judge refused to order the disclosure of a police informer's identity.
The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial and directed the Crown to disclose the informer's evidence, name, and whereabouts, and to make him available.
Before the second trial, the Crown produced a hooded man claiming to be the informer but refused to disclose his name or whereabouts.
The trial judge entered a stay of proceedings due to non-disclosure and unreasonable delay.
The Court of Appeal quashed the stay and ordered a new trial.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the stay but holding that the Crown had breached the binding disclosure order.
The Court directed that the trial proceed, giving the Crown the option to either fully comply with the disclosure order or apply to vary it based on new evidence regarding the informer's safety.
