The Crown appealed the sentence imposed on the respondent, who pleaded guilty to sexual interference.
The Crown argued the trial judge erred by departing from the parties' agreement on ancillary orders, specifically a section 161 prohibition and probation terms, without applying the Anthony-Cook joint submission standard.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that the agreement on ancillary orders did not constitute a joint submission on the core sentence, as the parties disagreed significantly on the length of custody.
The Court also held that the trial judge's discretionary orders were not demonstrably unfit.