The moving party, charged with historical sexual offences, applied for a stay of proceedings under s. 11(b) of the Charter, alleging unreasonable delay.
The total delay was 34.5 months, exceeding the presumptive ceiling.
However, the court found that an 8.5-month delay caused by the complainant's unexpected pregnancy and resulting stress constituted a 'discrete event' and an exceptional circumstance under the Jordan framework.
Deducting this delay brought the remaining time below the presumptive ceiling.
The court concluded the moving party failed to show the remaining delay was markedly in excess of what was reasonably required.
The application for a stay was dismissed.
