In a criminal fraud prosecution, the Crown sought to introduce statements the accused made under oath during an examination in bankruptcy proceedings under s. 161 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.
The court considered the scope of s. 13 of the Charter and the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Henry governing the use of prior testimony.
The court held that testimony given in a prior proceeding cannot be used by the Crown as part of its case in chief where it constitutes prior testimony protected by s. 13.
However, because the bankruptcy was voluntarily initiated and the statements were not legally compelled, the prior testimony could be used to cross-examine the accused if she chose to testify at trial.
