Nilam Lakhani

The applicant, Kamal Ford, brought a Charter application challenging the validity of search warrants executed at his residence and on his vehicle, and alleging a breach of his s. 10(b) right to counsel.

The court found that the Information to Obtain (ITO) contained misleading statements that required excision.

After excision, the court held there were reasonable grounds to search the residence for clothing and phones, but not for a firearm, and no reasonable grounds to search the vehicle.

The court found no breach of the right to counsel, as a 20-minute delay in facilitating a call was reasonable due to transport logistics.

Applying the Grant framework under s. 24(2), the court excluded the evidence seized from the vehicle but admitted the evidence seized from the residence and during the lawful search incident to arrest.

The Crown applied for an order permitting the complainant to testify via closed-circuit television (CCTV) pursuant to section 486.2(2) of the Criminal Code in a trial involving charges of sexual assault, assault, and uttering threats.

The accused opposed the application.

The complainant initially testified in person without accommodation but renewed her request after the first day of trial, stating that the accused's presence impeded her ability to provide full and candid testimony.

The court granted the application, finding that the nature of the allegations, the intimate partner relationship between the parties, the complainant's expressed fear and sense of intimidation, and the barrier this created to truthful testimony all favoured the granting of the order.