Collinge v. Gee

The appellant was tried by a magistrate, under Part XVI of the Criminal Code, and was convicted of fraud and false pretences. In order to determine whether an appeal was advisable, he requested the respondent, the court reporter, to make a transcript of the Court proceedings available to him without charge and, in the alternative, that he be permitted to inspect the transcript of the proceedings. His request having been refused, he applied to the Court for a writ of mandamus. The judge refused the application and his decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal. The accused appealed to this Court.

Held: The appeal should be dismissed.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia', affirming the dismissal of an application for a writ of mandamus. Appeal dismissed.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE (orally for the Court):-Mr. Burke- Robertson, we do not find it necessary to call upon you. We are all of opinion that when s. 471 of the Criminal Code directs that the evidence of witnesses for the prosecutor and the accused shall be taken in accordance with the provisions of Part XV relating to preliminary inquiries it refers to and incorporates, mutatis mutandis, s. 453(1) (a) and (b) and none of the other subsections of that section.

In view of this conclusion none of the other questions which were argued before us require decision.

The appeal is dimissed. There will be no order as to costs. Cartwright C.J. and Martland, Judson, Ritchie and Hall JJ. 1 W.W.R.

R.C.S.

Droit criminel-Procks par un magistrat sous la Partie XVI du Code criminel-L'accusd a-t-il droit d'avoir ou d'examiner la transcription des timoignages-Code criminel, 1953-54 (Can.), c. 51, art. 453, 454, 471, 555.

L'appelant a 6t6 jug6 par un magistrat, sous la Partie XVI du Code Cartwright criminel, et a 6t0 d6clar6 coupable de fraude et de faux semblants. Pour lui permettre de d~cider s'il devait en appeler, I'appelant a demand6 A l'intimbe, la st6nographe de la Cour, de lui procurer gratuitement une transcription des proc6dures et, alternativement, qu'il lui soit permis de 1'examiner. Sa demande ayant & refus&e, il a pr6sent6 une requite pour obtenir un bref de mandamus. Le juge a refus6 cette requate et sa d4cision a 6t6 confirm6e par la Cour d'appel. L'accus6 en a appel6 A cette Cour.

Arrdt: L'appel doit 6tre repet6.

APPEL d'un jugement de la Cour d'appel de la Colombie- Britanniquel, confirmant le refus d'une requite pour obtenir un bref de mandamus. Appel rejet6.

B. A. Crane, pour l'appelant.

W. G. Burke-Robertson, Q.C., pour 1'intim6e.

Lorsque le procureur de l'appelant eut termin6 sa plaidoirie, la Cour a rendu le jugement suivant:

THE CHIEF JusTIcE (orally for the Court):-Mr. Burke- Robertson, we do not find it necessary to call upon you. We are all of opinion that when s. 471 of the Criminal Code directs that the evidence of witnesses for the prosecutor and the accused shall be taken in accordance with the provisions of Part XV relating to preliminary inquiries it refers to and incorporates, mutatis mutandis, s. 453(1) (a) and (b) and none of of the other subsections of that section. In view of this conclusion none of the other questions which were argued before us require decision.

The appeal is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.

S.C.R.