R v. Reid

In Fish Cases, Forfeiture, Offences on (Updated )

This case involved approximately 12,000 pounds of sable fish that were seized pursuant to the provisions of the Fisheries Act and sold pending trial. After obtaining a stay of proceedings for failing to provide a trial within a reasonable time, the Crown brought an application for forfeiture of the proceeds of sale of the sable fish under s. 72(3). At the hearing the defence made preliminary objections on the grounds that: (1) a stay of proceedings did not amount to an acquittal for the purpose of s. 72(3); and (2) the improper detention barred the Crown’s application.

With respect to the stay, the court ruled that for the purposes or s. 72(3), a stay of proceedings amounted to an acquittal.

With respect to the improper detention, the court ruled that although the proceeds of sale of the fish was held improperly for period of time because the court did not get an continued detention order pursuant to s. 71(4), the improper holding ended when charges were laid. Based upon R. v. MacMillan Bloedel Ltd. , {1998} B.C.J. No. 908 (B.C.S.C.), the court ruled that since the improper holding was cured it was not a bar to the forfeiture proceeding.