3 total
The court dismissed the section 11(b) Charter application, finding COVID-19 justified the trial delay.
The applicant sought a stay of proceedings under section 24(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, alleging an infringement of their right to be tried within a reasonable time under section 11(b).
The total delay from the charge date to the anticipated trial conclusion was 27 months and 12 days, exceeding the 18-month presumptive ceiling set by R. v. Jordan.
The court analyzed the delay, attributing 16 months and 18 days to the COVID-19 pandemic as an exceptional discrete event.
After deducting this period, the remaining delay was approximately 11 months, falling below the presumptive ceiling.
The court found no evidence that the applicant took meaningful steps to expedite proceedings or that the case took markedly longer than it should have, concluding that the delay was primarily due to the unprecedented system-wide impact of the pandemic.
Consequently, the applicant's motion for a stay of proceedings was dismissed.
A conviction in absentia for a traffic offence was overturned and a new trial ordered because the defendant did not receive the revised trial notice.
The appellant was charged with failing to stop for a red light.
A trial date was set for May 24, 2016, then adjourned to September 12, 2016.
On September 12, 2016, the appellant attended court but the ticket was not before the court and the matter was not addressed.
A revised notice of trial was issued on September 21, 2016 for November 24, 2016, but the appellant did not receive this notice.
The appellant failed to attend the November 24, 2016 trial and was convicted in absentia.
On appeal, the appellant argued the court lost jurisdiction and sought either an acquittal or a new trial.
The court allowed the appeal, finding that while jurisdiction over the person was lost on September 12, 2016, it was regained by the issuance of the revised notice of trial.
However, because the appellant did not receive the notice and had always intended to dispute the charge, a new trial was ordered.
The court stayed a red light charge due to unreasonable delay after the conviction was reopened.
The defendant brought a motion for a stay of proceedings under section 24(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, alleging an infringement of her right to trial within a reasonable time under section 11(b) of the Charter.
The charge was for Red Light-Fail to Stop under the Highway Traffic Act.
The defendant was charged on November 2, 2010, and the matter proceeded through multiple trial dates, a conviction in absentia, a reopening of the conviction, and subsequent adjournments.
The court found that the total delay of 24 months and one week, with institutional delay of 10 months and 9 days, exceeded the guideline of 8 months established in R. v. Morin.
The court granted the stay of proceedings.
