Miranda Brar

The appellant appealed his convictions on three counts under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and sought leave to appeal his sentence.

The appellant argued the trial judge erred by failing to self-instruct on Vetrovec in relation to the co-accused's testimony and that the trial judge unevenly scrutinized the evidence.

The Court of Appeal found no error, noting ample independent corroborative evidence supported the co-accused's testimony.

On sentence, the appellant argued the trial judge failed to perform a proper Gladue analysis, but the court found no error given the Gladue Writer Program's inability to prepare a report and the trial judge's careful consideration of the appellant's circumstances.

Both the conviction appeal and sentence appeal were dismissed.

This decision clarifies the meaning of "export" under the Cannabis Act in the context of possession for the purpose of exporting cannabis.

The Court held that "export" means sending cannabis or industrial hemp from Canada to another country and does not require proof of commercial value or any additional purpose beyond the physical act of exportation.

The ruling emphasizes that the Act and its regulations permit exportation only for medical, scientific, or industrial hemp purposes, and that the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the possession was intended to cause the cannabis to leave Canada.

Megan Weston was arrested at Toronto Pearson International Airport with over 32 kg of cannabis concealed in her checked luggage, destined for London.

The Crown sought to qualify an RCMP Corporal as an expert witness on Canada as a cannabis source country, the UK as a recipient market, and cannabis pricing/value in the UK and GTA.

The defence opposed.

The court, applying the Mohan criteria, qualified the expert only for cannabis pricing and valuation in the GTA, finding the other areas irrelevant or lacking proper qualification.

This appeal concerned the denial of Indian status to Sharon Bocchini and her late mother, Bertha Isbister, descendants of St. Pierre Cook.

The Indian Registrar denied status based on Mr. Cook's historical receipt of "half-breed scrip" and withdrawal from treaty in the 1880s.

The court found that the Registrar erred in law by applying the wrong version of the Indian Act (1888 instead of 1886) to determine Mr. Cook's lawful withdrawal from treaty.

The court also found palpable and overriding errors of fact in the Registrar's conclusion that Mr. Cook lawfully received scrip, noting he was a minor (17 years old) at the time of application and sale, and that the Registrar failed to adequately consider evidence of widespread scrip fraud affecting the Sandy Bay Band.

The appeal was allowed, and the removal of Sharon Bocchini and Bertha Isbister from the Indian Register was reversed, with costs awarded to the appellant.

The plaintiffs, survivors and close family members of the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing, sought to recognize and enforce a US default judgment against the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The court granted the motion for default judgment, finding that the US court properly exercised jurisdiction, the judgment was final and conclusive, and no defences of fraud, public policy, or lack of natural justice were available.

The decision relied on the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (JVTA) and the State Immunity Act (SIA), which provide exceptions to state immunity for terrorism-related acts, and ordered the defendants to pay the specified damages and costs.