Case information
Conduct a refined search of the Supreme Court of Canada database to obtain details on the status of a matter before the Court.
38149
David Ajise v. Her Majesty the Queen
(Ontario) (Criminal) (As of Right)
Docket
Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.
| Date | Proceeding | Filed By (if applicable) |
|---|---|---|
| 2018-12-05 | Appeal closed | |
| 2018-11-28 | Transcript received, 33 pages | |
| 2018-11-26 | Formal judgment sent to the registrar of the court of appeal and all parties | |
| 2018-11-26 | Judgment on appeal and notice of deposit of judgment sent to all parties | |
| 2018-11-16 |
Judgment on the appeal rendered, Abe Ka Côt Br Row, The appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Number C57589, 2018 ONCA 494, dated May 30, 2018, was heard on November 16, 2018, and the Court on that day delivered the following judgment orally: ROWE J. — We are all of the view that the appeal should be dismissed. We would adopt what Justice Sharpe set out in para. 32 of the Court of Appeal decision: . . . assuming that resort to the [curative] proviso is required in this case, it is my view that the substance of the proviso point was raised. In her submissions before this court, Crown counsel placed considerable reliance upon the argument that the defence effectively conceded at trial that the donation claims were fraudulent and instead relied entirely on the appellant’s claim that he lacked knowledge of the fraud. On this basis, the Crown argued that even if the impugned evidence amounted to opinion evidence, it did not go to the only live issue at trial. The Crown also noted that Maraj’s impugned statements comprised a small portion of the evidence advanced during a multi-day trial, and were admitted without objection by defence counsel. In my view, these lines of argument amounted in substance to a submission that even if there was an error in admitting the evidence or in failing to conduct a voir dire, no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice had occurred and the appeal should be dismissed on that account. Given that there was no miscarriage of justice, the curative proviso was properly relied on in this case. Dismissed, no order as to costs |
|
| 2018-11-16 |
Hearing of the appeal, 2018-11-16, Abe Ka Côt Br Row Judgment rendered |
|
| 2018-11-16 | Respondent's condensed book, (Book Form), 14 copies (Submitted in Court) | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2018-11-16 | Appellant's condensed book, (Book Form), 14 copies (Submitted in Court) | David Ajise |
| 2018-11-14 | Correspondence received from, (Letter Form), Additional authority will be included in condensed book. | David Ajise |
| 2018-11-06 | Notice of appearance, (Letter Form), Kevin Wilson and Xenia Proestos will be present at the hearing. Mr. Wilson will present oral arguments. | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2018-11-01 | Notice of appearance, R. Craig Bottomley and Mayleah Quenneville will be present at the hearing. They will both present oral arguments. | David Ajise |
| 2018-10-09 | Correspondence received from, (Letter Form), Appellant will be relying on a new authority, and it will be included in their condensed book. | David Ajise |
| 2018-10-01 | Appeal perfected for hearing | |
| 2018-09-28 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form) | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2018-09-28 | Respondent's factum, (Book Form), Completed on: 2018-09-28 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2018-08-28 | Notice of hearing sent to parties | |
| 2018-08-27 | Correspondence received from, (Letter Form), Appellant's Record Master Index | David Ajise |
| 2018-08-23 | Correspondence received from, (Letter Form), Moira Dillon will act as agent for the Appellant. | David Ajise |
| 2018-08-20 |
Appeal hearing scheduled, 2018-11-16 Judgment rendered |
|
| 2018-08-09 | Letter advising the parties of tentative hearing date and filing deadlines (Notice of appeal – As of right) | |
| 2018-08-03 |
Appellant's record, (Book Form), (7 volumes), Part I filed separately, Parts II-IV filed electronically (21 volumes), Part V filed in 6 volumes. 28 volumes in total, Completed on: 2018-08-03 |
David Ajise |
| 2018-08-03 | Certificate of counsel (attesting to record), (Letter Form) | David Ajise |
| 2018-08-03 | Appellant's factum, (Book Form), Completed on: 2018-08-03 | David Ajise |
| 2018-08-03 | Correspondence received from, (Letter Form), Appellant will not be filing an application for leave to appeal in this matter. Appellant will not be filing authorities with his factum and record. | David Ajise |
| 2018-06-11 | Letter acknowledging receipt of a notice of appeal | |
| 2018-06-08 | Correspondence received from, (Letter Form), Mr. R. Craig Bottomley anticipates being counsel of Record before this Court for this matter, but will confirm at a later date. | David Ajise |
| 2018-06-08 | Certificate (on limitations to public access), (Letter Form) | David Ajise |
| 2018-06-08 | Notice of appeal, Completed on: 2018-06-08 | David Ajise |
Parties
Please note that in the case of closed files, the “Status” column reflects the status of the parties at the time of the proceedings. For more information about the proceedings and about the dates when the file was open, please consult the docket of the case in question.
Main parties
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Ajise, David | Appellant | Active |
v.
| Name | Role | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Her Majesty the Queen | Respondent | Active |
Counsel
Party: Ajise, David
Counsel
Mayleah Quenneville
Suite 1201 - 180 Bloor Street W.
Toronto, Ontario
M5S 2V6
Telephone: (416) 922-6161
FAX: (416) 934-0006
Email: bottomley@crimdefence.ca
Agent
900 - 275 Slater Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1P 5H9
Telephone: (613) 691-1224
FAX: (613) 691-1338
Email: mdillon@supremelawgroup.ca
Party: Her Majesty the Queen
Counsel
Xenia Proestos
P.O. Box 36, Exchange Tower
3400 - 130 King St. W.
Toronto, Ontario
M5X 1K6
Telephone: (416) 973-0026
FAX: (416) 973-8253
Email: kevin.wilson@justice.gc.ca
Agent
160 Elgin Street
Suite 1200
Ottawa, Ontario
K2P 2C4
Telephone: (613) 957-4770
FAX: (613) 941-7865
Email: flacasse@ppsc-sppc.gc.ca
Summary
Keywords
Criminal law - Fraud over $5,000 - Opinion evidence - Curative provision - Whether trial judge erred in admitting non-expert opinion evidence and in his jury instruction in relation to that evidence - Whether the majority of the Court of Appeal erred in allowing the Crown to rely on the curative provision when it had not expressly raised its intention to do so in its factum - Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985 c. C-46, s. 686(1)(b)(iii).
Summary
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.
Mr. Ajise, appellant, was convicted of fraud over $5,000 for filing false claims of charitable donations in his clients’ tax returns. He appealed his conviction on two grounds. First, he claimed the trial judge should not have admitted opinion evidence given by the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency investigator because she was not qualified as an expert. Second, he argued the trial judge did not properly instruct the jury on the mental element of the offence and the use that could be made of certain prior inconsistent statements. The majority of the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Pardu J.A., dissenting, would have allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial. In her view, the investigator’s opinion that the donations claimed were false was expert evidence that required a voir dire on admissibility, and the trial judge erred in failing to conduct a hearing. Since the Crown did not expressly argue the application of the curative provision, and because, in her view, the verdict would not necessarily have been the same but for the error relating to the opinion evidence, Pardu J.A. would not have applied the curative provision.
Lower court rulings
Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Appellant convicted of fraud over $5,000
Court of Appeal for Ontario
C57589, 2018 ONCA 494
Appeal dismissed
Memorandums of argument on application for leave to appeal
The memorandums of argument on an application for leave to appeal will be posted here 30 days after leave to appeal has been granted unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of the memorandum by filing out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a memorandum of argument or want to use a memorandum of argument, please contact the author of the memorandum of argument directly. Their name appears at the end of the memorandum of argument. The contact information for counsel is found in the “Counsel” tab of this page.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available
Related links
Factums on appeal
The factums of the appellant, the respondent and the intervener will be posted here at least 2 weeks before the hearing unless they contain personal information, information that is subject to a publication ban, or any other information that is not part of the public record. You may also obtain copies of factums by filling out the Request for Court records form or by contacting the Court’s Records Centre either by email at records-dossiers@scc-csc.ca or by telephone at 613‑996‑7933 or at 1‑888‑551‑1185.
If you have questions about a factum or want permission to use a factum, please contact the author of the factum directly. Their contact information appears on the first page of each factum.
Downloadable PDFs
Not available