On an appeal from a conviction quashed for miscarriage of justice arising from Crown non-disclosure, the Court addressed the proper remedy under s. 686(2) of the Criminal Code.
The Court held that where the Crown seeks an acquittal and undertakes to call no evidence at a new trial, an appellate court may enter an acquittal directly rather than require pro forma retrial steps or impose a judicial stay.
The Court emphasized that acquittal remains distinct from a stay and that a stay is a residual remedy considered only after primary remedies are assessed.
Applying those principles, the Court set aside the stay of proceedings and entered an acquittal.
