3 total
Absolute discharge granted for dangerous driving to avoid disproportionate collateral immigration consequences of deportation.
The accused pleaded guilty to dangerous operation of a motor vehicle after rear-ending another tractor trailer, which subsequently collided head-on with a third vehicle, resulting in a fatality.
The parties agreed the accused's driving did not cause the fatality.
The Crown sought a conviction, a $3,000 fine, and a 2-year driving prohibition.
The defence sought an absolute discharge, arguing a conviction would result in the accused's automatic deportation, a disproportionate collateral consequence.
The court granted an absolute discharge, imposing an 8-year driving prohibition and ordering $10,000 in restitution, finding that deportation would be disproportionate to the gravity of the offence and the accused's moral blameworthiness.
The court imposed an 8-month conditional sentence for possession of an unloaded firearm and stolen vehicle, rejecting the Crown's call for a lengthy custodial term based on general deterrence.
The accused, Cody Joseph O’Dwyer, pleaded guilty to possession of a stolen motor vehicle, unauthorized possession of an unloaded revolver, being an occupant of a vehicle with a revolver, and possession of a weapon dangerous to the public peace.
The court considered the appropriate sentence, rejecting the Crown's inferences that the firearm was used to menace the victim or that Thunder Bay had an "epidemic" of gun violence, citing insufficient statistical evidence and the principle of sentencing based on actual conduct rather than potential harm.
The court also discussed the limited efficacy of general deterrence for offenders involved in drug and gun activities.
Ultimately, the court imposed a conditional sentence of 240 days (approximately 8 months) followed by 18 months of probation, with specific conditions, finding that a conditional sentence could adequately address the objective of denunciation given the circumstances.
Mandatory injunction granted restoring commercial tenant's possession after landlord's illegal lockout during pandemic moratorium.
The applicant commercial tenant sought a mandatory interlocutory injunction to regain possession of leased premises after being locked out by the respondent landlord for unpaid rent.
The landlord argued the tenant was improperly receiving federal pandemic rent subsidies while failing to pay full rent, invoking the doctrine of ex turpi causa.
The court granted the injunction, finding the landlord violated the clear statutory moratorium on commercial evictions under the Commercial Tenancies Act, and ordered the landlord to restore possession to the tenant upon payment of a specified sum towards arrears.
