V. Hawkes

This is an appeal from a conviction for three counts of careless driving causing bodily harm and the dismissal of an application for a stay of proceedings under section 11(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The appellant challenged the admissibility of a roadside statement, the trial judge's finding of guilt and sufficiency of reasons, and the ruling on unreasonable delay due to the COVID-19 pandemic, including a request to admit fresh evidence.

The court dismissed the appeal, finding no error in law, no unreasonable verdict, and no miscarriage of justice regarding the voluntariness of the statement, the conviction, or the 11(b) application.

The defendant was charged with three counts of driving while her license was suspended and operating a motor vehicle without insurance.

The Crown's evidence established that a police officer observed the defendant operating a motor vehicle on August 20, 2013.

The defendant and a civilian witness testified that the defendant was a passenger and that another individual was driving.

The court found the defendant's evidence and that of the civilian witness not credible due to significant inconsistencies and implausibilities.

The court accepted the officer's evidence and found the defendant guilty of the three driving while suspended charges.

The insurance charge was dismissed by Crown concession.

The defendant was convicted after entering guilty pleas to five counts under the Highway Traffic Act: driving while license suspended, owning and driving a motor vehicle without insurance, failing to notify the Ministry of Transportation of vehicle ownership, using an unauthorized license plate, and not having a validated permit.

The defendant had an extensive driving record including nine prior convictions for driving suspended and six for operating without insurance.

The prosecution sought custody on two counts and a substantial fine for the insurance offense.

The defense argued for concurrent sentencing given the defendant's concurrent criminal convictions totaling 43 months.

The court imposed four months custody consecutive to existing sentences for the drive suspended offense, 15 days concurrent for the plate infraction, a $10,000 fine for the insurance offense with a 60-month payment period, and suspended sentence on the remaining charges.

The defendant entered a guilty plea to driving while his license was suspended under the Highway Traffic Act.

After conviction was entered, the court discovered that the defendant was also facing a related Criminal Code charge of "drive disqualified" arising from the same circumstances.

The justice struck the conviction and underlying plea, finding that the municipal partner court lacked administrative authority to proceed when criminal proceedings had been commenced in relation to the same circumstances, pursuant to the Memorandum of Understanding between the Crown and the City of Brantford.

The matter was directed to be marked returnable to the same court when the related Criminal Code charge would be considered.

The defendants were convicted of willfully evading compliance with the Retail Sales Tax Act by failing to collect, report, and remit retail sales tax totalling $240,866.42 over 54 reporting periods from August 1, 2004 to February 23, 2009.

The individual defendant, Eugena Hayward, was the sole director and operating mind of the corporate defendant.

The court found that the defendants had collected retail sales tax in trust for Ontario but failed to remit it, instead using the funds for personal benefit including dividend payments of $341,000 to Hayward.

The court imposed a custodial sentence and substantial fine on the individual defendant, reflecting the serious breach of trust and the need for denunciation and deterrence.