3 total
Summary conviction appeal dismissed; sexual assault count stayed under Kienapple and SOIRA order varied.
The appellant appealed his convictions for sexual assault and sexual interference.
During the hearing, the Court of Appeal discovered the Crown had proceeded summarily at trial, meaning the court lacked jurisdiction.
Because the court had already publicly dismissed the appeal on its merits, a panel judge was authorized under s. 13 of the Courts of Justice Act to sit as a Superior Court justice to hear the matter as a summary conviction appeal.
The appeal from conviction was dismissed, but the sexual assault count was stayed pursuant to the Kienapple principle, and the SOIRA order was varied to 10 years.
Appeal allowed and new trial ordered due to inadequate application of the W.(D.) framework.
The appellant appealed his conviction for a drug-related offence.
The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge failed to adequately apply the W.(D.) framework to assess the appellant's credibility regarding his knowledge of the presence of cocaine.
The appeal was allowed, the conviction was set aside, and a new trial was ordered.
Request to amend application and add union as respondent denied due to delay and prejudice.
The applicant sought to amend his human rights application and add his union as a respondent over two years after the initial filing.
The respondents and the union opposed the request, arguing prejudice due to the closure of the workplace and the union's operations.
The Tribunal denied the request, finding it untimely and prejudicial, as it would unduly broaden the scope of the application shortly before the scheduled hearing.
