The young person was charged with animal cruelty offences and applied for a stay of proceedings under section 11(b) of the Charter, alleging unreasonable delay.
Although the anticipated time to trial was below the presumptive 18-month ceiling, the defence argued the case took markedly longer than reasonably necessary due to the Crown's failure to provide essential disclosure in a timely manner.
The court found that the defence took sustained and meaningful steps to expedite the proceedings, while the police and Crown demonstrated complacency regarding disclosure obligations.
Recognizing the enhanced need for timeliness in youth matters and the significant prejudice suffered by the young person, the court concluded the delay was unreasonable and stayed the charges.
