Ronald Joseph Horace Poirier

Ian R. Fummerton, owner and operator of ABI Trucking Inc., pleaded guilty to being a party to dangerous driving under section 249 of the Criminal Code.

The charge arose from his failure to ensure compliance by drivers with provincial hours of service regulations, permitting single-driver round trips between Thunder Bay and Toronto that could not be legally completed within regulated timelines, and condoning the use of multiple logbooks to falsify records.

This conduct created a significant risk to public safety, although Fummerton was not charged with causing the fatal accident that initiated the investigation.

The Crown sought 12 months imprisonment, while the defence argued for a conditional discharge or conditional sentence.

The court emphasized general deterrence and denunciation, finding that Fummerton's prolonged, persistent, and frequent disregard for safety regulations and economic motivation warranted incarceration.

Mr. Milani was convicted of multiple home invasion sexual assaults and related offences committed between 1985 and 1987.

The court determined a fit sentence, considering the Kienapple principle for multiple convictions, the circumstances of the four incidents, the offender's background, and the profound impact on victims.

The Crown sought 20 years to life, while the defence proposed 5-8 years.

The court imposed a global sentence of 20 years imprisonment, along with ancillary orders including a lifetime weapons prohibition, communication prohibition with victims, DNA sample submission, and sex offender registration.

The accused, Ryan Wilson Christiansen, was found guilty by a jury of possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking, possession of oxycodone for the purpose of trafficking, and possession of proceeds of crime ($21,250).

The court considered aggravating factors, including the significant quantities of drugs, the sophisticated nature of the operation, and a prior trafficking conviction.

Mitigating factors included the accused's age (31), family support, personal strengths, employment history, learning disability, and the recent suicide of his wife.

The court emphasized general and specific deterrence as primary sentencing principles for drug trafficking.

After considering pre-sentence custody and stringent bail conditions, the court imposed a total effective sentence of five years and nine months imprisonment.

Ancillary orders included forfeiture of proceeds of crime and drugs, a lifetime firearms prohibition, and a DNA order.

The accused brought a constitutional application alleging breaches of ss. 8, 9, and 10(b) of the Charter following a roadside stop, detention, arrest, and search that led to the discovery of marijuana in a vehicle.

Police stopped the vehicle while investigating a reported gasoline theft based on a vague suspect description and observations they considered suspicious.

The court found the officers lacked reasonable grounds to suspect the accused was connected to the reported offence, rendering the investigative detention arbitrary.

Because the detention and arrest were unlawful, the subsequent search of the vehicle and seizure of marijuana were also unlawful.

Applying the s. 24(2) test from Grant, the court excluded the seized marijuana and the accused’s statements as admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The offender pleaded guilty to possession of oxycodone for the purpose of trafficking contrary to s. 5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act after police discovered 296 oxycodone pills and cash in a vehicle.

The Crown sought a custodial sentence of 12 to 18 months emphasizing general deterrence due to the severe impact of opioid trafficking in Northwestern Ontario communities.

The defence argued for a conditional sentence based on the offender’s lack of criminal record, significant personal hardships, demonstrated rehabilitation, and positive prospects for employment and education.

Applying the principles in ss. 718, 718.1, and 718.2 of the Criminal Code and the conditional sentence framework in s. 742.1, the court concluded that a community-based sentence with strict conditions would sufficiently address denunciation and deterrence while supporting rehabilitation.

A conditional sentence of two years less a day followed by probation was imposed.

The applicants sought judicial review of four decisions of the Ontario Labour Relations Board, including procedural decisions denying an adjournment and change of venue, and a final decision declaring the applicants to be one employer bound to certain collective agreements.

The applicants argued the Board breached natural justice by refusing to adjourn the hearing from Toronto to Thunder Bay.

The Divisional Court dismissed the application, finding the Board's travel policy reasonable and noting the applicants failed to provide adequate reasons for their non-attendance when invited to do so.

The Court also upheld the Board's document production order.

The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.

The defence brought a Charter application alleging breaches of the right to counsel and the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure.

The defence argued that the accused was not advised of her right to consult French-speaking duty counsel and that breath samples were not taken as soon as practicable.

The court found no Charter breach, as the accused understood her rights in both French and English, indicated no language preference, and did not voice concerns about understanding duty counsel.

The court also found that breath samples were taken as soon as practicable, with police acting reasonably throughout the detention and testing process.

The accused was found guilty.

The accused, an Aboriginal woman from Long Lake 58 First Nation, pleaded guilty to trafficking marijuana to three children aged 11 to 14 years.

She was bound by a conditional sentence order at the time of the offence.

The Crown sought six to nine months imprisonment; the defence sought a conditional sentence of six months.

The court imposed four months imprisonment followed by twelve months probation with conditions including abstinence from controlled substances and participation in rehabilitative programs.

A ten-year firearms prohibition was also imposed.

The court balanced the serious nature of trafficking to children with Gladue factors reflecting the accused's history of abuse, neglect, and systemic disadvantage.

The appellant appealed a conviction and sentence related to workplace safety violations.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the actus reus issue was settled by prior jurisprudence and the appellant failed to establish a due diligence defence on a balance of probabilities.

The court also found no error in law in the sentence imposed.

The applicant sought leave to appeal its conviction and $20,000 fine under the Occupational Health and Safety Act for failing to take reasonable precautions to protect a worker who was hit by a truck.

The applicant argued the lower courts erred in finding that a mandatory regulatory requirement to have a traffic protection plan made it unnecessary to assess whether such a plan was a reasonable precaution in the circumstances.

The Court of Appeal denied leave, finding that the provincial offences appeal court judge's alternative finding—that a traffic protection plan was indeed a reasonable precaution given the busy worksite—was supported by the evidence and justified applying the curative proviso.