L. Zhao

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

The trial concluded over 21 months after the information was sworn.

The accused brought an application under section 11(b) of the Charter, arguing unreasonable delay.

The Crown argued that the delay was partially caused by the defence and the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically the unavailability of an in-person French interpreter.

The court found that the failure to secure an in-person interpreter was a state failure, not a discrete event caused by the pandemic.

After deducting defence delay, the net delay exceeded the 18-month presumptive ceiling.

The court found a violation of section 11(b) and granted a stay of proceedings.

The accused was arrested for impaired driving and lodged in an OPP holding cell.

She was provided a privacy gown but given no instructions on its use.

When she used the toilet in her cell, she was video recorded with her genitals exposed.

The court found a serious violation of her section 8 Charter rights, noting the police's failure to follow their own policies regarding detainee privacy established after the Mok decision.

Given the egregious nature of the breach and the humiliation suffered by the accused, the court ordered a stay of proceedings.

The applicant brought an application for a stay of proceedings under section 11(b) of the Charter, citing a total delay of 20.82 months.

The Crown argued that the COVID-19 pandemic, delayed disclosure, and personnel changes constituted exceptional circumstances justifying the delay.

The court rejected these arguments, finding no causal link between the pandemic and the delay, and noting that the Crown and police failed to provide timely disclosure.

The application was granted, and the charges were stayed.