Jennifer M. Moser

The accused was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference against a 12-year-old neighbour in their apartment building hallway.

The court applied the W.(D.) framework to assess credibility, rejecting the accused's testimony as not credible due to implausible memory gaps.

The court accepted the complainant's clear and reliable evidence, which was corroborated by surveillance video.

The accused was found guilty on both counts, with the sexual assault conviction stayed under the Kienapple principle.

The plaintiff brought a motion for partial default judgment against the defendants for unpaid electrical equipment and services.

The defendants were noted in default and did not move to set it aside.

The court granted default judgment for breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation, finding the defendants made false representations to secure continued services.

The court denied claims for specific performance and mandatory injunctive relief as incompatible with a full damages award, and awarded partial indemnity costs.

The applicant mother brought a motion requesting the involvement of the Office of the Children's Lawyer (OCL) or a section 112 assessment for the child.

The respondent father brought cross-motions for security for costs and a mental health assessment of the applicant.

The court dismissed the request for OCL involvement, finding it would not be in the child's best interests and would draw her back into the parents' high-conflict dynamic.

The court also dismissed the request for a mental health assessment, finding insufficient evidence of a clinical issue impairing parenting capacity.

The court granted the respondent's motion for security for costs in part, ordering the applicant to post $8,700 (representing outstanding costs awards) within 60 days of the determination of her pending spousal support claim.

The accused was charged with being a party to sexual assault, sexual interference, and procuring a person under 18 for sexual activity.

The Crown alleged that the accused allowed two masked men to sexually assault her 10-year-old daughter in exchange for cigarettes and cash.

The court applied the W.(D.) framework to assess the conflicting testimony of the accused and the child complainant.

The court found the child's evidence credible and reliable, rejecting the accused's denials.

The accused was found guilty on all counts.

The applicant sought to exclude evidence of drugs and cash found during a warrantless search of his vehicle following a high-risk takedown of his passenger, who was wanted on violent warrants.

The court found that while the initial containment of the vehicle to arrest the passenger was lawful, the continued detention of the applicant and the subsequent search of his satchels breached his ss. 8 and 9 Charter rights.

The court held that the police lacked reasonable suspicion to detain the applicant for flight from police or to conduct a safety search of the vehicle after a pat-down revealed no weapons.

The evidence was excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter.

The accused was charged with dangerous operation causing death and bodily harm following a fatal motor vehicle collision.

In pre-trial motions, the accused sought to exclude Airbag Control Module (ACM) data and an Ambulance Call Report (ACR) under s. 24(2) of the Charter, alleging s. 8 breaches.

The court found the warrantless seizure of the vehicle and its ACM data was lawful under s. 489(2)(c) of the Criminal Code.

Although police breached s. 8 by failing to file a proper Report to Justice, the ACM data was admitted under s. 24(2).

Conversely, the court found the police breached s. 8 by obtaining the accused's ACR without a warrant via a PHIPA request, as the accused maintained a reasonable expectation of privacy in her medical records.

The ACR and any derivative evidence were excluded under s. 24(2).