Travis Moore

The accused was found in the driver's seat of a damaged vehicle and arrested after failing a roadside breath test.

At the station, she provided breath samples showing a blood alcohol concentration over 200mg.

She challenged the admissibility of the breath results, alleging Charter breaches regarding the officer's grounds for arrest, delay in facilitating access to counsel, and an arbitrary overhold at the station.

The court found a 32-minute arbitrary detention but declined to exclude the evidence under section 24(2).

The court also rejected arguments that a 'purge fail' during testing rendered the results unreliable.

The accused was found guilty of operating a conveyance with a blood alcohol concentration over 80mg.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario considered the appeals of Rushawn Anderson and Nicholas Rhoden from convictions for attempted murder and aggravated assault.

The appellants argued that the trial judge erred in admitting out-of-court statements, in his rulings on Charter violations, in instructing the jury on fabrication, and that the verdicts were unreasonable.

The majority dismissed the appeals, finding the fabrication instruction sufficient and the verdicts reasonable.

In dissent, Gomery J.A. would have allowed the appeals, finding the fabrication instruction flawed and the verdicts unreasonable, and would have substituted acquittals.

The appellant, Harvey Colin Quinlan, appealed a sentence of a $40,000 fine and 12 months probation for violating s. 8(1) of the Building Code Act by commencing construction without a permit.

The appellate court found the original sentence demonstrably unfit and based on errors in principle, as it fell outside the established jurisprudential range of $500-$5000 for similar first offences.

The court emphasized the importance of considering mitigating factors, such as the appellant's self-reporting, efforts to mitigate harm by hiring an engineer, and pro-social motive (providing low-cost housing for vulnerable seniors), which the trial judge had largely ignored.

The appeal was allowed, and the fine was reduced to $2,000, while the probation term remained.

This is an addendum to reasons for judgment in a child protection matter under Part III of the Child and Family Services Act.

The court issued an addendum to clarify that the original order dated October 20, 2016 should include a provision granting the maternal grandparents authority to renew the child's passport and to travel with the child, or authorize the child's travel, out of Canada, without notice to or consent of the mother.

The addendum was necessary because this relief, which was discussed during the hearing and in the original reasons, was inadvertently omitted from the order section of the judgment.

The complainant, a 16-year-old receiving welfare assistance, applied to rent an apartment from the respondent.

The respondent initially accepted the application but later refused to rent to the complainant after learning her age and that the welfare office would not pre-pay the last month's rent.

The Board of Inquiry found that the respondent discriminated against the complainant on the basis of age and receipt of public assistance.

The Board also held that the estate of the respondent's late wife could not be held liable for the respondent's discriminatory conduct as executor.

The respondent was ordered to pay $162 in special damages and $2,500 in general damages.