Décisions de la Cour

Abonnez-vous au fil de nouvelles RSS afin de consulter les décisions

• Nouvelles décisions : Cour de justice de l’Ontario

Cour de justice de l’Ontario – décisions récentes

• 2025-12-10 R. v. Beites, 2025 ONCJ 647 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Procedure — Adjournment — Post‑verdict Charter application — Should sentencing be adjourned to permit a s. 11(b) application after findings of guilt? — Trial management expectations set and reiterated on the record — Defence unequivocally declined to bring the application on the continuation date — Lateness contrary to the proper administration of justice — Adjournment refused<br />Rights and freedoms — Charter s. 11(b) — Timeliness of application — Does the defence’s tactical decision to await an acquittal comply with the duty to act proactively under J.F.? — Jordan framework requires parties to be accountable and proactive — MacLaughlin applied to post‑verdict request — Accused not acting in a timely manner — Application not heard<br />Procedure — Trial management — Discretion to refuse hearing — Is the court entitled to decline to hear a s. 11(b) application in these circumstances? — Defence possessed all relevant information and chose not to proceed — Opportunity to argue mid‑trial was provided and declined — Court resources and mitigation of delay considered — Application refused and sentencing to proceed
• 2025-12-09 R. v. Smith, 2025 ONCJ 646 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Criminal and statutory offences — Firearms — Self-defence — Whether the Crown disproved self-defence under Criminal Code s. 34 — Did the accused reasonably apprehend harm before discharging toward an occupied place? — Catalyst and response elements assessed with Khill — Video showed no weapon, no aggression, no descent of stairs — Count 1 proven beyond a reasonable doubt — Conviction entered<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Firearms offences — Elements — Whether carrying a concealed weapon, possessing a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, and unauthorized possession of a loaded firearm were proven — Admissions of loaded handgun in satchel while conducting a drug deal — Elements under ss. 90(1), 88(1), 95(1) established beyond a reasonable doubt — Convictions entered<br />Evidence — Video recordings — Credibility assessment — Whether the surveillance videos undermine the accused’s account — No bulge, no item in hand, no aggressive gestures on entry video — Panic attack claim and “I have it” statement rejected — W.(D.) applied considering the whole of the evidence — Agreed facts and videos preferred over testimony — Accused’s testimony rejected<br />Evidence — Standard of proof — W.(D.) in self-defence — Whether the modified W.(D.) framework raises a reasonable doubt of lawful self-defence — Three-step analysis from Reid, Brown, Martin applied — Crown’s burden to disprove self-defence beyond a reasonable doubt maintained — Holistic assessment consistent with Khill — No reasonable doubt on self-defence — Defence rejected
• 2025-12-05 R. v. Taylor, 2025 ONCJ 651 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Rights and freedoms — Detention and search — Arbitrary detention and ASD — Was the stopping of the accused near his residence arbitrary? — Whether the officer had a reasonable suspicion and whether the ASD demand was timely — Highway Traffic Act, s. 48, and R v Orbanski applied — No s. 9 breach and no s. 8 breach found — Charter breach not established<br />Rights and freedoms — Right to counsel — Advice and counsel of choice — Did Mr. Taylor have the right to advice from counsel from the moment stopped? — Whether counsel of choice unavailability and lack of diligence breached s. 10(b) — Roadside sobriety exception confirmed, multiple options offered including duty counsel — No s. 10(b) breach<br />Rights and freedoms — Remedies — Exclusion of evidence — The approved instrument demand not made as soon as practicable under s. 320.28(1) — Should the breath test evidence be excluded under s. 24(2)? — Breach arose largely from the accused’s conduct, minimal impact on protected interests, reliability high — Exclusion would bring administration of justice into disrepute — Breath tests admitted<br />Criminal and statutory offences — Impaired driving — 80+ — Mouth alcohol and tests outside two hours — Do ss. 320.31(1) and 320.31(4) make the readings conclusive and applicable to the offence window? — “Evidence to the contrary” barred, protocol satisfied, 5 mg per 30 minutes read‑back applied — Cell video did not undermine accuracy — Charge proved, finding of guilt
• 2025-12-04 Children’s Aid Society of Toronto v. T.M., 2025 ONCJ 639 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Child protection — Disposition — Best interests — CYFSA, ss. 74(3), 101 — Whether extended society care or supervision order with the mother best protects the children — Weight given to consistent wishes and emotional safety — Parenting capacity and insight assessed — Society’s “give a chance” position rejected — Extended care ordered<br />Evidence — Hearsay — Children’s statements — State of mind and experiences — Admissibility of wishes as spontaneous utterances — Necessity and threshold reliability met for statements about visits — Weight disputed and addressed in best interests analysis — Children not called — Statements admitted and given significant weight<br />Child protection — Access — Children in extended care — CYFSA, ss. 104(1), 105(6) — Whether access with mother is beneficial and meaningful and impact on adoption — Children’s anxiety around calls considered — Cultural and identity factors balanced — Access limited to supervised virtual contact six times yearly — Access restricted<br />Child protection — Protection — Risk and needs — CYFSA, s. 101(1) — Ongoing need of protection based on mother’s mental health symptoms and lack of insight — Impact of relocation, conflict and inconsistent behaviour on children — Parenting supports noted but insufficient to mitigate risk — Continued need of protection found
• 2025-12-03 R. v. El Achqer, 2025 ONCJ 632 (CanLII)
  Key Words: Rights and freedoms — Detention — Investigative detention — Whether the detention was arbitrary under s. 9 — Reasonable suspicion assessed on totality of circumstances — Nexus to recent or ongoing drug trafficking in Unit 1201 — Mann standard applied, necessity and brevity considered — Coordinated execution of warrants and risk of loss of evidence accepted — Section 9 claim dismissed<br />Rights and freedoms — Search and seizure — Seizure of information — Did asking “what apartment are you coming from” during detention constitute a s. 8 breach? — Detainee compelled to answer while under police control — Harris (ONCA) applied to non-consensual taking of information — Warrantless seizure of incriminating information found unreasonable — Breach found<br />Rights and freedoms — Right to counsel — Informational component — Whether delaying s. 10(b) until after entry was permissible — Suberu immediacy requirement applied — No officer or public safety concerns — Dynamic situation and preservation-of-evidence rationale insufficient — Accused uninformed for approximately six minutes during detention — Breach found<br />Evidence — Exclusion of evidence — Charter remedies — Whether drug and cash evidence was “obtained in a manner” that infringed the Charter — Valid search warrant unchallenged, discovery independent of breaches — Temporal and contextual link too remote, Strachan considered — Alternatively, Grant balancing favours admission given reliability and serious charges — Evidence admitted