A prisoner appealed the setting aside of a stay entered after a trial judge found a section 7 breach arising from severe mistreatment by a state actor during transport custody.
The Court held that appellate review of section 24(1) remedies is highly deferential and intervention is justified only for legal error, reviewable factual error, or a clearly unjust result.
On the trial findings, the stay remained an available and proportionate remedy in exceptional circumstances where continuation would undermine confidence in the administration of justice.
The Court also held that, when setting aside a stay, an appellate court may in appropriate cases remit the matter for continuation of trial under Criminal Code sections 686(4) and 686(8).
