COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
RE:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN (Appellant) – and – MARCEL TESSIER (Respondent)
BEFORE:
ROSENBERG, GOUDGE and FELDMAN JJ.A.
COUNSEL:
Marie Comiskey
for the appellant
John Hale
for the respondent
HEARD & RELEASED ORALLY:
April 5, 2006
On appeal from the order of Justice Adams of the Ontario Court of Justice dated March 2, 2005.
E N D O R S E M E N T
1Heaving regard to the circumstances of this case, it is not necessary to provide a definitive statement of the meaning of s. 113(1)(a) of the Criminal Code. At the very least, if s. 113(1)(a) can apply to a farmer who requires a weapon to protect his livestock from serious a predator problem, there would have to be circumstances where the offender either solely or predominately depends on the firearm to sustain himself or his family. That is not this case. The respondent’s principal means of livelihood is from his pest control business and he does not require a firearm to sustain himself or his family.
2Accordingly the appeal is allowed and the s. 113(1)(a) exemption is set aside.
Signed: “M. Rosenberg J.A.”
“S.T. Goudge J.A.”
“K. Feldman J.A.”