Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Charter - Criminal law - Right to be tried within a reasonable time - Right to life, liberty and security of person - Appeals - Standard of Review - What is the proper standard of review on appeal from a decision to stay proceedings under s. 11(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? - To what extent, if any, does pre-charge delay inform the inherent time requirements of a case, including the time required for the Crown to make complete and timely disclosure and prepare its case post-charge? - Should the time taken to litigate a Charter issue and the time taken by the prosecution to comply with a trial judge’s ensuing order be characterized as delay in a s. 11(b) analysis? - Where a court of appeal sets aside a stay of proceedings for delay, does that court have jurisdiction to direct a continuation of the trial by the original trial judge from the point the stay was entered? - If so, under what circumstances should such an order be made?

In January 2004, the Applicants were charged with attempt to obstruct justice, perjury, assault causing bodily harm, extortion, theft and conspiracy to obstruct justice. The charges arose from five investigations the Applicants conducted while they were members of the Toronto Police Service. It is alleged, among other things, that the Applicants conducted warrantless, illegal searches of residences, stole money and/or drugs from suspected drug dealers, falsified records, swore false informations to obtain search warrants after the searches had been conducted, and provided perjured testimony in subsequent criminal proceedings. On consent of the parties, the suggested target date for the trial was January 8, 2008. By the end of December 2007, it became clear that the pre-trial motions would not be completed in time to start the trial on that date, and the trial was rescheduled. The Applicants eventually moved for a stay of proceedings. They argued that their rights to a fair trial under s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms had been violated on the basis of the impact the combination of pre and post-charge delay would have on evidence and fading memories. The Applicants also argued that the passage of time from the laying of charges to the estimated end of the trial violated their s. 11(b) Charter right to be tried within a reasonable time. The trial judge granted a stay of proceedings. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the stay of proceedings, and ordered a new trial.