The appellant, owner of a boarding house where a fatal fire occurred, was charged with causing a fire by violating a municipal fire prevention by-law under s. 392(1)(b) of the Criminal Code.
The Crown sought to rely on the deeming provision in s. 392(2) to establish causation.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that s. 392(2), which deems a person to have wilfully caused a fire if they fail to comply with fire-safety laws, applies only to charges of wilfully causing a fire under s. 392(1)(a).
As the appellant was charged under s. 392(1)(b), the deeming provision did not apply, and the acquittal was restored.
