Ontario Court of Justice

Date: June 27, 2023

Between:

HIS MAJESTY THE KING

— AND —

DEVANTE MOORES

Before: Justice Louise A. Botham

Ruling on Sufficiency of Judicial Summaries

Counsel: Faiyaz Alibhai & Sara Gardezi …...... for the Public Prosecution Service of Canada Ravin Pillay ……………………………..… Counsel for the Applicant Devante Moores

BOTHAM J.:

[1] On April 2, 2022 a search warrant was executed at 25 Esplanade, Unit 2415. The Applicant’s car and residence was also searched pursuant to the same warrant.

[2] The ITO sworn in support of the warrant authorizing both searches has been heavily redacted. The Respondent has prepared a judicial summary with respect to the ITO. I have heard submissions from the Respondent with respect to the proposed summary during three in-camera proceedings. I have reviewed the judicial summary and compared it to the unredacted ITO.

[3] Our Court of Appeal in Crevier 2015 ONCA 619, 2015 OJ NO 5109 at para 72, explained that a well-crafted judicial summary means only that the accused be aware of the general nature of the redacted details, not the details themselves. This is necessarily a challenging process requiring the reviewing judge to be satisfied that the summary includes as much information as possible, while maintaining informer privilege. The reality is, as the Court states in Crevier, para 83, the summary will never be a complete substitution for full disclosure. However it should also be remembered that the scope of my review is to determine whether the preconditions for the issuance of the warrant were met. The relevant factors set out in para 84 of Crevier are helpful in highlighting the type of information which ought to have been before the issuing justice. It is not contemplated that the actual details of that information would be provided to the Applicant.

[4] Having reviewed both the judicial summary and the unredacted ITO, I am satisfied that the summary is sufficient to inform the Applicant as to the nature of the excised material in order to challenge it in argument or by evidence. If other issues arise as a result of the Applicant’s cross-examination of the affiant, the adequacy of the judicial summary, as always, can be revisited.

Released: June 27, 2023

Justice Louise A. Botham