2 total
The court dismissed a Charter application, ruling that endorsing a Jenkins Caution on a charging information does not imply previous convictions or prejudice a fair trial.
The applicant brought a constitutional application challenging the endorsement of a "Jenkins Caution" on the reverse side of his charging information for driving while under suspension.
The applicant argued that the endorsement violated his Charter rights under sections 7 and 11(d) by prejudicing the trier of fact regarding the existence of previous convictions and preventing him from receiving a fair and impartial trial.
The applicant sought a stay of proceedings.
The court dismissed the application, finding that the Jenkins Caution endorsement was an administrative pro-active measure documenting the prosecution's obligations and did not constitute a breach of Charter rights.
The defendant was convicted of failing to report a material change in circumstances to the WSIB after surveillance evidence contradicted her claims of severe disability.
The defendant was charged with wilfully failing to inform the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board of a material change in circumstances in connection with her entitlement to benefits within 10 days after the change occurred, contrary to section 149(2) of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997.
The defendant had been receiving benefits for work-related back injuries and depression since 2007.
The prosecution presented surveillance evidence showing the defendant engaging in numerous independent activities (driving, shopping, attending events) during June 1-6, 2011, which contradicted her reported condition of severe pain and limited mobility.
The court found that the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt both the actus reus and mens rea of the offence, rejecting the defendant's arguments regarding language barriers and medication effects.
The defendant was convicted.
