Identity theft

The accused pleaded guilty to a major mortgage fraud targeting an 83-year-old woman with dementia living in a long-term care home.

The accused and an unidentified female accomplice impersonated the victim and her son to secure a fraudulent mortgage, resulting in a loss of over $780,000 borne by the bank.

The court rejected the defence's request for a conditional sentence, emphasizing the need for denunciation and deterrence given the vulnerability of the victim and the high moral blameworthiness of the offence.

The accused was sentenced to three years in the penitentiary and ordered to pay $583,455 in restitution.

The appellant, Shane Sureskumar, appealed his convictions for identity theft, attempted fraud over $5,000, fraud over $5,000, and fraudulent possession of credit card data, and sought leave to appeal his sentence.

The convictions stemmed from his actions as a bank teller accessing client data and attempting/executing fraudulent transfers.

The appeal challenged the trial judge's findings on a s. 8 Charter breach regarding a search incident to arrest, the s. 24(2) exclusion of evidence, and the validity of a search warrant for his cell phone.

The appellant also argued the trial judge erred in not imposing a conditional sentence.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeal, finding a s. 8 breach but upholding the admission of evidence under s. 24(2) due to good faith and discoverability, and affirming the cell phone warrant.

Leave to appeal sentence was granted, but the sentence appeal was dismissed, as the trial judge properly considered and rejected a conditional sentence, weighing aggravating factors (breach of trust, quantum, sophistication, greed) against modest mitigating factors (youthful first-time offender, no loss).

The defendant Mercedes-Benz Canada Inc. moved to strike the plaintiff's statement of claim against it without leave to amend.

The plaintiff alleged that his identity was stolen and used in a 'straw buy' of a luxury vehicle, and claimed Mercedes was liable in negligence, vicarious liability, and waiver of tort for the actions of its franchisee.

The court found that the statement of claim failed to plead material facts to support a duty of care, breach, causation, or compensable damages in negligence, nor did it support vicarious liability or an agency relationship.

The court struck the claim against Mercedes without leave to amend and dismissed the action against it.

The moving party, an employee of the invoice payor, brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the fraud action against him.

The plaintiff factoring company was defrauded of millions of dollars through fictitious invoices.

The moving party claimed his identity was stolen by the fraudsters to confirm the fake invoices and that he was also a victim.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that conflicting evidence regarding the moving party's emails, his financial ties to the fraudulent payee, and credibility issues among the co-defendants created genuine issues requiring a trial.

The appellant appealed a 12-month prison sentence imposed for fraud over $5,000 contrary to s. 380(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.

The appellant, an accountant and real estate agent, had prepared 292 false tax returns using clients' personal information without consent between 2009 and 2012, obtaining $35,321 through fraudulent tax refunds while attempting to obtain $343,840.

The sentencing judge rejected a conditional sentence, emphasizing general deterrence and denunciation as paramount in fraud cases involving breaches of trust.

The appellant argued the sentencing judge erred by failing to consider his offer of restitution.

The Court of Appeal found the failure to consider restitution was an error in principle but held it did not impact the sentence imposed, as restitution must take a secondary role to deterrence and denunciation in large-scale fraud cases involving breaches of trust.

The defendant, Rajeev Henry Balendra, brought a motion for a directed verdict on four counts of an indictment: fraudulent possession of credit card data, conspiracy to commit fraud, possession of identity information with intent to commit an indictable offence, and possession of forged credit cards.

The Crown presented circumstantial evidence, including a USB drive with over 2,000 credit card numbers found on the accused, counterfeit driver's licenses, and financial institution affidavits detailing losses.

The court applied the test for a directed verdict, determining whether sufficient evidence existed for a jury, properly instructed, to convict.

The court found ample evidence from which a jury could reasonably infer the accused's knowledge and intent, satisfying the elements of all remaining counts.

The motion for a directed verdict was dismissed.

The plaintiffs sought certification of a class proceeding against a bank and a former employee who improperly accessed customers’ confidential financial information and disclosed it to third parties, leading to identity theft and fraud affecting numerous customers.

The court considered the requirements for certification under s. 5(1) of the Class Proceedings Act, 1992, including whether the pleadings disclosed causes of action such as negligence, breach of contract, intrusion upon seclusion, vicarious liability, and waiver of tort.

The court held that several pleaded claims disclosed viable causes of action and that the proposed class of 643 customers whose information had been accessed constituted an identifiable class.

The court further found that the issues of negligence, breach of contract, vicarious liability for intrusion upon seclusion, and waiver of tort raised common issues and that a class proceeding was the preferable procedure for resolving them.

The proposed representative plaintiffs were found to be suitable and capable of advancing the litigation.

Sentencing decision following convictions for numerous fraud‑related offences including theft over $5000, possession of property obtained by crime, extortion, intimidation, possession of devices for forging credit cards, fraudulent possession and use of credit card data, and forgery.

Police discovered sophisticated equipment used to manufacture fraudulent credit cards and identification, as well as extensive stolen credit card data.

The offender had a lengthy criminal record involving similar offences and prior custodial sentences, including a sentence in the United States.

The court emphasized the seriousness of organized credit card fraud and the importance of deterrence, while acknowledging limited prospects for rehabilitation.

Applying the totality principle, the court imposed a global penitentiary sentence.

Multiple accused brought directed verdict motions in a jury trial alleging fraud and conspiracy involving the takeover of ING Direct customer bank accounts using confidential customer information.

The court reviewed the legal requirements for conspiracy, emphasizing the need for proof of an agreement and a shared unlawful objective, which may be inferred from circumstantial evidence.

The court held that there was some evidence capable of supporting an inference of conspiratorial agreement for certain counts, including evidence that one accused obtained confidential banking information and that another used that information to access accounts and transfer funds.

The motions for directed verdicts were dismissed for several accused because the evidence could permit a properly instructed jury to infer participation in the conspiracy or fraud.

However, one accused obtained a directed verdict of acquittal on a specific fraud count due to insufficient evidence linking him to the fraudulent transfer of funds.

The accused was charged with fraud over $5,000, using a forged document, and three counts of failing to comply with a recognizance after staying 56 days in a luxury hotel without paying and tendering a counterfeit cheque exceeding $20,000.

Police conducted a warrantless search of the accused’s hotel room and seized computers and documents, leading to a Charter s. 8 challenge.

The court held the accused had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the hotel room and that the search violated s. 8.

However, applying the framework in Grant, the court admitted the evidence because the police acted in good faith, the breach was not serious, and the evidence was reliable and central to the Crown’s case.

Based on circumstantial evidence, including forged corporate documents and counterfeit cheque materials found in the room, the court concluded the accused orchestrated a fraudulent scheme and knowingly used a forged cheque.

Five defendants were tried on over 100 fraud-related counts involving a sophisticated "bust out" credit card fraud scheme spanning approximately a decade.

The Crown alleged that Kuhen Neshan and Ramanan Kenegarajah were the leaders of a criminal organization that defrauded financial institutions of hundreds of thousands of dollars through fraudulent credit card applications, identity theft, and money laundering.

The scheme involved creating false identities, using post office boxes to evade detection, and purchasing real estate to launder proceeds.

The trial lasted 28 days over 18 months, with the Crown calling 47 witnesses and tendering 134 exhibits.

The defendants elected not to call evidence and raised various Charter challenges and legal arguments regarding jurisdiction, conspiracy, and the single transaction rule.

The accused applied for a bail review after being detained on secondary grounds following charges involving drug trafficking, firearms, identity theft-related offences, and breaches of recognizance.

The reviewing judge found that the justice of the peace erred in principle by failing to properly assess the proposed supervision plan and by making a factual error regarding the amount of money found on the accused.

The court reassessed the detention decision under both the secondary and tertiary grounds of s. 515(10) of the Criminal Code.

Although the allegations were serious and involved drugs, firearms, and identity theft, the court concluded that the proposed surety and strict supervision plan sufficiently mitigated the risk of reoffending.

Detention was therefore not justified and release was ordered with strict conditions.

The representative plaintiff brought a motion for approval of a settlement agreement in a class action arising from the loss of an unencrypted USB key containing the personal information of over 83,000 individuals who received H1N1 vaccines.

The proposed settlement established a claims process for class members who suffered economic harm, with a claim period ending in August 2016, but provided no direct cash payments for anxiety or distress.

Despite objections from some class members regarding the lack of immediate compensation and the length of the claims period, the court approved the settlement as fair and reasonable.

The court noted that the risk of identity theft had largely dissipated over time, making the prospects of success at trial poor, and also approved class counsel fees of $500,000 plus a percentage of future claims.

The offenders were convicted of multiple counts of mortgage fraud involving 11 properties and 27 mortgages over a 7-year period.

They used stolen identities, forged documents, and false powers of attorney to obtain mortgage financing, resulting in over $1 million in losses to financial institutions and the CMHC.

The court rejected a conditional sentence, emphasizing denunciation and general deterrence for large-scale frauds.

Each offender was sentenced to 4 years in a penitentiary.

The court also ordered fines in lieu of forfeiture totaling $495,535.04 and a joint and several restitution order in the same amount payable to the CMHC.