Product details

Practice area: 
General
Jurisdiction: 
General
ISBN: 
9781731985712

Handling Summary Conviction Offences 2022 Edition

Availability:

Handling Summary Conviction Offences 2022 Edition is a comprehensive guide to the defence and prosecution of summary conviction offence cases. It includes elements of summary conviction offences and incorpates applicable recent case law.

Recent Developments: Legislative Update

On 18 February 2021, proposed amendments were introduced to the Criminal Code and Controlled Drugs and Substances Act that would eliminate a number of mandatory minimum penalties. These include 14 offences in the Criminal Code, such as possession of a prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition, possession of a firearm or weapon knowing its possession is unauthorized, and selling tobacco products and raw leaf tobacco. Mandatory minimum penalties are retained for other criminal offences, such as sexual offences and impaired driving offences, and some firearms offences. All six mandatory minimum penalties under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act would be repealed.

Recent Developments: Case Law Update

In R v Thanabalasingham, 2020 SCC 18, the Supreme Court stated that the clear and distinct message in Jordan was that all participants in the system are to take proactive measures at all stages of the trial process to move cases forward and bring accused persons to trial in a timely fashion. Crown counsel must make “reasonable and responsible decisions regarding who to prosecute and for what, delivering on their disclosure obligations promptly … creating plans for complex prosecutions, and using court time efficiently” (Jordan, at para. 138). Defence counsel must be aware that, aside from time legitimately taken to respond to the charges, they “will have directly caused the delay if the court and the Crown are ready to proceed, but [they are] not” (Jordan, at para. 64) Trial judges are charged with curtailing unnecessary delay and changing courtroom culture.

In Quebec (A.G.) v 9147-0732 Quebec Inc., 2020 SCC 32, it was held that it was not open to a corporation to challenge the constitutionality of a minimum fine on the basis that it offended its right to be protected against cruel and unusual treatment or punishment under s.12 of the Charter of Rights. Section 12 of the Charter does not protect corporations from cruel and unusual treatment or punishment because the text “cruel and unusual” denotes protection that only human beings can enjoy.

In Ontario (Attorney General) v G., 2020 SCC 38, a provision in the provincial sex offender registry was found to violate s.15 of the Charter of Rights on the basis that individuals either convicted or found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder of sexual offences were to have their personal information added to the registry and report to the police at least once a year to keep the information up to date. However, there were opportunities for exemption from such requirements available to individuals found guilty of sexual offences but not to those found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder who were granted an absolute discharge.

Handling Summary Conviction Offences 2022 Edition

Description

Handling Summary Conviction Offences 2022 Edition is a comprehensive guide to the defence and prosecution of summary conviction offence cases. It includes elements of summary conviction offences and incorpates applicable recent case law.

Recent Developments: Legislative Update

On 18 February 2021, proposed amendments were introduced to the Criminal Code and Controlled Drugs and Substances Act that would eliminate a number of mandatory minimum penalties. These include 14 offences in the Criminal Code, such as possession of a prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition, possession of a firearm or weapon knowing its possession is unauthorized, and selling tobacco products and raw leaf tobacco. Mandatory minimum penalties are retained for other criminal offences, such as sexual offences and impaired driving offences, and some firearms offences. All six mandatory minimum penalties under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act would be repealed.

Recent Developments: Case Law Update

In R v Thanabalasingham, 2020 SCC 18, the Supreme Court stated that the clear and distinct message in Jordan was that all participants in the system are to take proactive measures at all stages of the trial process to move cases forward and bring accused persons to trial in a timely fashion. Crown counsel must make “reasonable and responsible decisions regarding who to prosecute and for what, delivering on their disclosure obligations promptly … creating plans for complex prosecutions, and using court time efficiently” (Jordan, at para. 138). Defence counsel must be aware that, aside from time legitimately taken to respond to the charges, they “will have directly caused the delay if the court and the Crown are ready to proceed, but [they are] not” (Jordan, at para. 64) Trial judges are charged with curtailing unnecessary delay and changing courtroom culture.

In Quebec (A.G.) v 9147-0732 Quebec Inc., 2020 SCC 32, it was held that it was not open to a corporation to challenge the constitutionality of a minimum fine on the basis that it offended its right to be protected against cruel and unusual treatment or punishment under s.12 of the Charter of Rights. Section 12 of the Charter does not protect corporations from cruel and unusual treatment or punishment because the text “cruel and unusual” denotes protection that only human beings can enjoy.

In Ontario (Attorney General) v G., 2020 SCC 38, a provision in the provincial sex offender registry was found to violate s.15 of the Charter of Rights on the basis that individuals either convicted or found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder of sexual offences were to have their personal information added to the registry and report to the police at least once a year to keep the information up to date. However, there were opportunities for exemption from such requirements available to individuals found guilty of sexual offences but not to those found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder who were granted an absolute discharge.