Hyperlawhypertext legal database R. v. Thompson [1980] 1 SCR 1063

← Cases

R. v. Thompson

[1980] 1 SCR 1063 Court SCC Decision date 1980-03-03 English

PartiesHer Majesty The Queen Appellant·Wesley Grant Thompson Respondent

Counsel (4)
E.G. Ewaschuk, Q.C., and R. Fainstein, for the appellant.
Barrie Chivers, for the respondent.
Solicitor for the appellant: E.G. Ewaschuk, Ottawa.
Solicitor for the respondent: A.B.C. Chivers, Ottawa.

Judges Martland, Ronald; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Pigeon, Louis-Philippe; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; Estey, Willard Zebedee; McIntyre, William Rogers

Delivered by Judgment of the Court — DICKSON J.

On appeal from Northwest Territories

Subjects Criminal law

Contents

Judgment of the Court — DICKSON J.

The judgment of the Court was delivered by

DICKSON J.—The judgment in R. v. Krannenburg, delivered concurrently, determines the present appeal. The facts in the two cases are different, but the procedural question is common to both.
In the instant case, the respondent was charged with (i) failing to comply with a demand made by a peace officer to provide a sample of his breath; and (ii) driving while impaired. On the appointed date, he appeared before the magistrate in Hay River, Northwest Territories. Paragraph 9 of the agreed statement of facts reads:
THAT at that time, the Clerk could not locate the informations, that the informations were not present in
[Page 1064]
Court and that no action of any nature whatsoever was taken by the Court on the charges.
Nothing was done. The informations were missing. It later developed that they were in the possession of another magistrate in Yellowknife. When the respondent was summoned to appear at a later date, objection was taken to the jurisdiction of the Court.
The Court of Appeal of the Northwest Territories, following the judgment of the Alberta Appellate Division in Krannenburg, allowed the appeal of the accused from the decision of Tallis J.
I would dismiss the appeal. Pursuant to the order granting leave to appeal to this Court, the appellant will pay the costs of the respondent on a solicitor and client basis.
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Solicitor for the appellant: E.G. Ewaschuk, Ottawa.
Solicitor for the respondent: A.B.C. Chivers, Ottawa.

Footnotes

  1. [1] (1978), 38 C.C.C. (2d) 498.