Supreme Court of Canada
R. v. Thompson, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1063
Date: 1980-03-03
Her Majesty The
Queen Appellant;
and
Wesley Grant
Thompson Respondent.
1979: October 17; 1980: March 3.
Present: Martland, Ritchie, Pigeon, Dickson,
Beetz, Estey and McIntyre JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIES
Criminal law—Court clerk unable to locate
informations on date of scheduled appearance—No action taken by Court on
charges—Informations later located elsewhere with another magistrate—Accused
summoned to appear at later date—Objection taken to jurisdiction of Court—Loss
of jurisdiction.
R. v. Krannenburg, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 1053, followed.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Appeal for the Northwest
Territories allowing an appeal from a decision of Tallis J.
dismissing the respondent’s application for an order of prohibition. Appeal
dismissed.
E.G. Ewaschuk, Q.C., and R. Fainstein,
for the appellant.
Barrie Chivers, for the respondent.
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.