2 total
A preliminary inquiry judge cannot compel third-party document production for an anticipated constitutional challenge.
Health Canada sought to quash a subpoena issued to Louis Proulx, its Manager of Litigation, or alternatively to excuse him from testifying at a preliminary inquiry.
The respondent, charged with offences under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, sought to call Proulx to provide evidence regarding the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations and Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations, as well as to identify Health Canada employees who could provide such evidence and produce related documentation.
The respondent intended to use this evidence to support an anticipated constitutional challenge to section 5(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act at trial.
The court found that the subpoena was tantamount to an improper order for third-party document production and that the requested evidence, relating to the constitutionality of legislation rather than to the charges or alleged Charter breaches during investigation, arrest, or detention, was not properly discoverable at the preliminary inquiry stage.
Vexatious litigant's motion quashed for failing to obtain leave prior to initiating appellate proceedings.
The moving party, a declared vexatious litigant, brought a motion to set aside an order dismissing his request for a stay of a Superior Court order.
The respondents brought a cross-motion to quash the motion on the basis that the moving party failed to obtain leave from the Superior Court before initiating further proceedings.
The Court of Appeal found the moving party's motion was moot as his appeal had already been dismissed for delay.
The Court granted the cross-motion, quashed the moving party's motion as an abuse of process, and ordered that he may not bring any further proceedings in the Court of Appeal without leave.
