The respondents were charged with offences relating to cannabis production, and their property was seized.
The charges were stayed due to unreasonable delay under s. 11(b) of the Charter.
The Crown subsequently applied for forfeiture of the seized property.
The Supreme Court of Canada held that while the Court of Québec lacked jurisdiction under provisions tied to trial and sentencing (ss. 462.37 and 491.1 Cr.
C. and s. 16 CDSA), it retained jurisdiction under the residual disposition provision (s. 490(9) Cr.
C.).
The stay of proceedings did not preclude the Crown from seeking forfeiture, as forfeiture proceedings are distinct from criminal liability proceedings and do not engage double jeopardy.
