3 total
The offender was sentenced to 11 months' incarceration for sexual assault and related offences.
This is a sentencing decision for an offender convicted of sexual assault, two counts of common assault, and one count of breach of undertaking.
The court considered the principles of sentencing under section 718 of the Criminal Code, including deterrence, denunciation, and rehabilitation, alongside the offender's subjective circumstances, such as his youth, psychological challenges (ADD/ADHD, learning disability), community service, and stable employment.
The court rejected a conditional sentence due to the seriousness of the sexual assault and the breach of undertaking, which undermined public confidence.
A total sentence of 11 months incarceration was imposed, followed by a two-year probation order, a DNA order, a 10-year SOIRA order, and a 10-year firearms prohibition.
The accused was convicted of robbery based on an implied threat of violence but acquitted of using an imitation firearm.
Saad Fouad was charged with robbery and using an imitation firearm.
The court found him guilty of robbery, determining that an implied threat of violence existed based on the totality of circumstances, including leading the victim to a dark, secluded area where a second individual brandished an object perceived as a gun.
However, he was found not guilty of using an imitation firearm because the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was the individual who brandished the object, as witness testimony indicated it was the second male, not Fouad.
The court dismissed a motion to set aside a divorce order due to the moving party's delay and the responding party's subsequent remarriage.
The Respondent Wife brought a motion to set aside a divorce order obtained by the Applicant Husband, alleging non-service of documentation and misrepresentation in the Husband's affidavit for divorce.
The court found that the Wife delayed in bringing the motion and refused to accept a "nunc pro tunc" order severing the divorce from corollary relief, which would have addressed her claimed prejudice.
The court weighed the prejudice to both parties, noting the Husband had remarried, and dismissed the Wife's motion.
Instead, the court ordered the consolidation of three related files and, with the Husband's consent, severed the divorce from the corollary relief nunc pro tunc as of January 16, 2018.
Costs were awarded to the Husband.