Nick Whitfield

The appellant appealed a conviction for dangerous operation of a conveyance causing bodily harm arising from a collision with an electric scooter rider on a residential street.

He argued that the trial judge misapprehended the evidence concerning his emotional state, improperly relied on demeanour evidence, and erred in rejecting his position that the incident reflected only a momentary lapse of attention.

The court held that the characterization of the appellant's emotional condition was supported by the record, that any demeanour-based inference was invited by defence counsel, and that the trial judge committed no reversible error in treating the conduct as a marked departure from the reasonable standard of care.

The conviction appeal was dismissed, and the sentence appeal was dismissed as abandoned.

The appellant, K.M., appealed convictions for sexual assault and for choking the complainant to render her incapable of resisting.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the appeal, finding that while the trial judge’s reasons were not ideal, they were sufficient when read contextually.

The trial judge’s credibility findings and rejection of the defence theory of fabrication were adequately explained, and the application of the W.(D.) framework was proper.

The appeal was dismissed.

The applicant, convicted of sexual assault and sentenced to 18 months' incarceration, sought bail pending a second appeal after his first appeal to the Superior Court of Justice was dismissed.

The applicant argued the trial judge misapprehended evidence regarding the complainant's participation in sexual activity prior to penetration, affecting the defence of honest mistaken belief in communicated consent.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the bail application, finding the grounds of appeal were arguable but not strong, and that the enforceability interest outweighed the reviewability interest, particularly given the seriousness of the offence and the failure of the first appeal.

The defendant, Ganon Nathan, applied for directed verdicts of acquittal on charges of sexual assault and sexual exploitation.

The court reviewed the legal tests for directed verdicts and the essential elements of the offences, particularly concerning vitiated consent due to abuse of a position of power (sexual assault) and the existence of an exploitative relationship (sexual exploitation).

The court found sufficient evidence on all essential elements for both charges, including evidence of a power imbalance and an exploitative relationship, and dismissed the application for directed verdicts.

The plaintiffs brought a motion for approval of a minor's settlement arising from a medical incident.

The action was commenced in Toronto, but the plaintiffs sought leave to bring the motion in Picton to avoid delays and backlog in Toronto.

The court dismissed the request for leave, holding that 'jurisdiction shopping' is not an appropriate solution to judicial backlog and directed the plaintiffs to bring the motion in Toronto.