D. Kappos

The defendant was charged under the Provincial Offences Act with operating a milk plant without a licence contrary to section 15(1) of the Milk Act.

The defendant admitted to processing and selling raw milk and milk products to customers who signed waivers, arguing his operation was private and exempt from public welfare legislation.

The court rejected this defence, finding that the Milk Act is public welfare legislation designed to protect public health, which cannot be contracted out of through private agreements.

The defendant was found guilty.

The appellants appealed their convictions and sentences for operating a quarry without a licence contrary to the Aggregate Resources Act.

They raised several grounds of appeal, including that the corporate appellant was unrepresented, the search warrant should have been quashed, the trial judge improperly classified the offence as absolute liability, there was an apprehension of bias, and the trial judge improperly altered the transcript.

The appeal court dismissed the conviction appeal, finding that the individual appellant properly represented the corporation, the search warrant review was handled correctly, and although the trial judge erred in classifying the offence as absolute liability, no miscarriage of justice occurred because no due diligence defence was advanced.

The court found no bias and held that the transcript alterations did not affect the outcome.

The sentence appeal was partially allowed on consent of the Crown to correct a minor miscalculation in the days of operation, reducing the total fines from $402,000 to $383,000, but the court otherwise found the substantial fines fit given the deliberate and prolonged nature of the offences.