Hyperlawhypertext legal database Postman v. The Queen [1978] 2 SCR 392

← Cases

Postman v. The Queen

[1978] 2 SCR 392 Court SCC Decision date 1978-03-02 English

PartiesRodney Glenn Postman Appellant·Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

Counsel (4)
D.A. McGillivray, for the appellant.
P.S. Chrumka, Q.C., for the respondent.
Solicitor for the appellant: D.A. McGillivray, Calgary.
Solicitor for the respondent: P.S. Chrumka, Calgary.

Judges Laskin, Bora; Martland, Ronald; Spence, Wishart Flett; Pigeon, Louis-Philippe; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Estey, Willard Zebedee; Pratte, Yves

Delivered by Majority

On appeal from Alberta

Subjects Appeal

Contents

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

THE CHIEF JUSTICE—We are all of the opinion that this Court has no jurisdiction to hear this appeal which purports to be brought here as of right. The record does not, as it should, contain the formal judgment of the Alberta Appellate Division specifying the ground of dissent in law, as required by s. 606 of the Criminal Code. Moreover, we are not satisfied that the dissenting reasons of Morrow J.A. disclose that he has dissented on a strict question of law. The appeal must accordingly be quashed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: D.A. McGillivray, Calgary.
Solicitor for the respondent: P.S. Chrumka, Calgary.

Footnotes

  1. [1] (1977), 3 Alta. L.R. (2d) 139.

Statutes and regulations cited