Geoffrey Uyeno

The appellant appealed from a decision dismissing her application for certiorari to quash her convictions for offences under a municipal by-law and the Dog Owners' Liability Act.

The reviewing judge held that certiorari was not available because the appellant should have pursued her appeal rights under the Provincial Offences Act.

The Court of Appeal agreed, noting that section 141(3) of the Provincial Offences Act expressly prohibits applications to quash a conviction where an appeal is provided.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant sought leave to appeal his convictions under the Building Code Act and the Planning Act related to the size of his restaurant.

He argued that fresh evidence should have been admitted to show his building permit application was forged, and that he had a legal non-conforming use allowing a larger restaurant.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the application, finding the fresh evidence would not have affected the outcome and the applicant failed to prove his entitlement to a legal non-conforming use, which he lost in any event by altering the premises to comply with the by-law.

The appellant sought an extension of time to file an appeal from conviction under s. 135 of the Provincial Offences Act.

The provincial judge treated the hearing as an appeal on the merits and dismissed it without giving the appellant an opportunity to be heard.

The Crown conceded this was an error.

The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, quashed the dismissal and the underlying conviction, struck the guilty plea, and ordered a new trial.