ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
HIS MAJESTY THE KING
— AND —
IAN DORION
Before Justice J.R. Richardson
Heard on March 12, 2026
Oral Ruling Given March 12, 2026
Reasons for Judgment released on March 13, 2026
Alan Findlay counsel for the Crown
Ian Dorion.................................................................................................... on his own behalf
Introduction
1Mr. Dorion is charged with one count of Failing to Comply with a Probation Order contrary to section 733.1 of the Criminal Code. It is alleged that he failed to report.
2The Information was sworn by Probation Officer Arden Innis at Kemptville, Ontario on January 9, 2026.
3The Information and the accompanying summons were confirmed by Justice of the Peace Snyder the same day.
4The summons was served by Constable J. Gemmell on January 20, 2026. Constable Gemmell’s Affidavit of Service is in the Court File. Constable Gemmell deposed that he served it on Mr. Dorion by delivering it to him personally.
5The summons required Mr. Dorion to appear in Court on March 6, 2026. It also required him to appear at the Brockville Police Service, 2269 Parkedale Avenue, Brockville on March 10, 2026 for the purpose of the Identification of Criminals Act.
6On March 6, 2026, Mr. Dorion attended for his court appearance and the Crown elected to proceed summarily.
7Mr. Dorion then brought an application to rescind the requirement to attend for the purpose of the Identification of Criminals Act and to declare that term “null, void and unenforceable”.
8The Application was brought in the Ontario Court, and I am exercising jurisdiction pursuant to section 523(2) of the Criminal Code.
9Mr. Dorion did not appear on March 10. His prints and photographs remain outstanding.
10The application came on before me on March 12, 2026.
11I dismissed the balance of the application; in particular, I declined to delete the term in its entirety or to find that the term was “null, void and unenforceable.” I briefly summarized my reasons for doing so on March 12, 2026, and indicated that I would release written reasons later.
12These are those reasons.
13I also varied the summons to permit him to attend at the Kemptville OPP station on March 19, 2026. I did so in the hopes that if he would not be charged with a Fail to Appear for not appearing on March 10 if he ultimately attended for the purposes of the Act once I ruled on his Application.
Position of Mr. Dorion
14Mr. Dorion argued that once the Crown elects to proceed summarily, the proceeding is deemed to be a summary conviction matter from the beginning and therefore the Identification of Criminals Act does not apply because it does not apply to summary conviction matters.
15He cites R. v. Dudley, 2009 SCC 58 and R. v. Webley, 2015 ONSC 3857 as authority for this proposition.
Position of the Crown
16Crown counsel argued that since the decisions in Dudley and Webley, Parliament has amended the Identification of Criminals Act to make the taking of photographs and prints pursuant to that act permissible notwithstanding the Crown’s election.
Analysis
17The Crown is correct.
18The Identification of Criminals Act was amended to first include summary conviction proceedings in 2019. There were further amendments in late 2022 which came into force in early 2023. Prior to all of these amendments, the interpretation that Mr.