The Crown appealed from a stay of proceedings granted on the basis of trial delay.
The court accepted that a delay of approximately 4 years and 5 months was prima facie unreasonable, and that for slightly over three years there could not have been a trial regardless of the accused's readiness.
The court held that the Crown should have been ready for trial earlier, and that Crown-attributable delay combined with actual prejudice made a stay appropriate for both the respondent and the corporate accused.
The appeal was dismissed.
