The applicants, who were respondents on a Crown appeal from a stay of proceedings for unreasonable delay, brought a motion to dismiss the appeal for the Crown's failure to perfect it in time.
The Crown filed its factum over nine months late without explanation.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion, finding that while the Crown's delay was excessive and negligent, the applicants had taken no steps to ensure timely perfection, were not prejudiced by the delay, and the charges of serious fraud warranted a hearing on the merits.
The court also dismissed the applicants' request for costs against the Crown, as the Crown's conduct did not amount to a marked and substantial departure from reasonable standards.
A separate motion by one applicant for the appointment of counsel under s. 684 of the Criminal Code was granted.
