2 total
The court dismissed a Charter application for a stay of proceedings, finding police force justified and a 24-hour bail delay inconsequential.
The applicants, Ajitpal Gill and Gurvinder Kang, brought a Charter application seeking a stay of proceedings based on alleged infringements of their rights under Sections 7, 9, and 12.
They claimed excessive force by police during arrest and a breach of their right to be brought before a justice within 24 hours as per Section 503 of the Criminal Code.
The court found that while some police conduct was unprofessional, it did not amount to a substantial interference with the applicants' physical and psychological integrity, especially given the serious and dangerous circumstances preceding the arrest.
Regarding the 24-hour rule breach, the Crown conceded the breach, but the court found it to be technical and inconsequential, causing no actual prejudice.
The application for a stay of proceedings was dismissed.
The court dismissed the appeal against a careless driving conviction, finding no errors in admitting a roadside statement, sufficiency of reasons, or calculating COVID-19 delay under section 11(b).
This is an appeal from a conviction for three counts of careless driving causing bodily harm and the dismissal of an application for a stay of proceedings under section 11(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The appellant challenged the admissibility of a roadside statement, the trial judge's finding of guilt and sufficiency of reasons, and the ruling on unreasonable delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic, including a request to admit fresh evidence.
The court dismissed the appeal, finding no error in law, no unreasonable verdict, and no miscarriage of justice regarding the voluntariness of the statement, the conviction, or the 11(b) application.
