M. O’Brien

The plaintiff moved for a further examination for discovery of the corporate representative of the New Vector defendants.

The initial examination was aborted because the representative produced had no personal knowledge, failed to prepare, and defence counsel improperly obstructed questioning.

The court found that the defendant's conduct in thwarting discovery constituted special circumstances justifying a second examination.

The motion was granted, and the defendant was ordered to produce a properly prepared representative and pay substantial indemnity costs of $35,000.

Two accused charged with first degree murder applied for judicial interim release under s. 522 of the Criminal Code.

The Crown relied on extensive circumstantial evidence, including surveillance footage, eyewitness accounts of the shooting, cell phone records, and DNA evidence linking the accused’s vehicle to the victim.

The court found the Crown’s case to be overwhelming and concluded there was a high probability of conviction.

The proposed sureties, largely family members, were found inadequate to provide meaningful supervision or ensure compliance with bail conditions.

Detention was ordered on the primary, secondary, and tertiary grounds, including concerns about flight risk, potential interference with the administration of justice, and maintaining public confidence in the justice system.