The 2018-2019 Annotated Contraventions Act is a must-have reference to the 3,000 federal statutory and regulatory offences.
A must-have reference to the 3,000 federal statutory and regulatory offences that have been designated as contraventions under the contraventions legislation, The 2018-2019 Annotated Contraventions Act includes the full text of the Contraventions Act and Regulations, including the short-form descriptions of scheduled offences. The author provides comprehensive annotations, including skillfully prepared commentary, applicable case law and cross-references to related Criminal Code sections. It also includes a systematic examination of companion amendments to federal statutes such as the Canada Evidence Act, Criminal Code and the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
New in this edition
The 2018-2019 Annotated Contraventions Act incorporates the following:
- Application of Provincial Laws Regulations amended by SOR/2017-136 and SOR/2017-284
- Contraventions Regulations amended by SOR/2017-251 and SOR/2018-19
Case Law Updates:
- Bessette v. British Columbia (Attorney General), 2018 BCCA 59 – applicant’s request to hold trial on charge of driving while prohibited in French was dismissed. A stay of the provincial court trial proceedings was granted pending the application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.
- R. v. Boukaras, 2017 ONCJ 608 – the justice of the peace committed reversible legal error in dismissing the charge because the officer had no independent recollection of the events that brought the defendant to court.
- Oshawa (City) v. 536813 Ontario Ltd., 2017 ONCJ 83 - the trial justice erred by ordering costs in the amount of $111,000.00 against the prosecution. The evidentiary record did not support a finding that the conduct of the prosecutors constituted “a marked and unacceptable departure from the reasonable standards expected of the prosecution.”
- R. v. Balanzin, 2017 ONCJ 88 – the court is entitled to ask focused questions of either party to obtain the benefit of their submissions on particular issues.
- Cape Breton (Regional Municipality) v. Morrison, 2017 NSSC 347 – whether it was the defence at trial who raised the issue of identity or whether the issue was raised by the court, does not change or alter the Adjudicator’s role, which was to base his decision on the evidence before him. Regardless of whether the defence raised the issue, the Crown’s burden remained the same, that is, to prove the essential elements of the offence.