Heather A. McArthur

The accused was charged with driving over 80 and required a Tigrigna interpreter for trial.

A voir dire was held to determine whether a conditionally accredited interpreter was qualified to provide interpretation services.

The court found that the interpreter, despite being bilingual and having seven years of court experience, was not qualified to interpret for the trial based on his performance on the Ministry of the Attorney General's accreditation test.

The court emphasized that bilingualism alone does not equate to interpretation competence and that objectively valid skills testing is the most reliable way to assess interpreter qualifications for complex trials.

The accused brought a motion pursuant to sections 11(b) and 24(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms seeking a stay of proceedings on the basis that her right to be tried within a reasonable time had been infringed.

The accused was charged with refusing to comply with a demand to provide a breath sample.

The court found that the combined institutional and Crown delay exceeded the Morin guideline of eight to ten months by more than two months.

The Crown had adjourned the original trial date to allow an officer to testify in another matter, and subsequently failed to make officers available for numerous rescheduled dates.

The court inferred prejudice to the accused's security of the person and found that the delay was unreasonable.

A stay of proceedings was granted.

An accused charged with impaired driving and over 80 brought an application for a conditional stay of proceedings until state-funded counsel was provided.

The Crown opposed, arguing that since the accused faced only a fine and not incarceration, the application should be dismissed.

The court held that the absence of a jail sentence does not preclude an order for state-funded counsel where counsel is essential to a fair trial.

The court found the accused was indigent with no other means to retain counsel, and that counsel was essential given the complexity of the case (including issues regarding the two-hour limit for breath samples, potential statement voir dire, and a medical defence) and the accused's severe health issues that would impair his ability to participate effectively in his defence.

The proceedings were conditionally stayed pending provision of state-funded counsel.