A provincial offence trial under the Smoke-Free Ontario Act concerning whether a tobacco retailer failed to post prescribed government identification signs in a conspicuous manner as required by regulation.
The Crown alleged the defendant failed to post the identification sign where tobacco transactions occurred.
The defendant argued the sign was posted conspicuously on the countertop near the cashier and that even if the actus reus was proven, a due diligence defence applied.
The court found the prosecution failed to prove the offence beyond a reasonable doubt due to conflicting testimony regarding sign placement and visibility.
The defendant was acquitted.
The court also found that had the actus reus been proven, the defendant would have successfully mounted a due diligence defence based on the owner's comprehensive compliance systems, training procedures, and reasonable care measures.
