The appellant appealed a firearms prohibition and forfeiture order made under section 117.05(4) of the Criminal Code.
The order was initially granted after the appellant, a university student, wrote disturbing comments on an exam, prompting police to seize his lawfully owned firearms.
The Superior Court of Justice allowed the appeal, finding that the hearing judge erred in law by shifting the burden of proof from the Crown to the appellant and by relying on irrelevant considerations such as the number of firearms owned.
The order was set aside and the matter remitted for a new hearing.
