This case involved a charge of possession of undersize lobsters. After the lobsters were seized, they were put in a bucket and carried by a fisheries officer to his truck. He then put the lobsters in a bag and marked it with a black marker. The bag was put into a freezer where it was stored until the evening before …
Full SummaryR v. Harris, 1997 CanLII 990
This case involved a charge against a fisher for failing to comply with a term of his fishing licence, namely exceeding the amount of by catch of Hake as allowed by his licence. At trial he gave evidence that he relied upon an experienced crew member to follow his instructions. The crew member had been doing the job properly for …
Full SummaryR v. LeBlanc, 1998 CanLII 17596
This was a summary conviction appeal of an acquittal of a fish boat Captain upon evidence that his son had been "sneaky enough" to hide under the floor without the knowledge of his father. The court upheld the acquittal without a great deal of analysis. It said "the judge did not want to convict the accused for being deceived by …
Full SummaryR v. Vanbuskirk, 1999 CanLII 2346
This case was a summary conviction appeal by a fisherman who was convicted of failing to provide an accurate hail of the round weight of his catch. In setting aside his conviction and ordering a new trial, the court relied upon the following test as set out in R. v. Doucette (24 November 1998) No. 745660 (N.S.Prov. Ct.): "Has the …
Full SummaryR v. Chung Hoa Truong and Ca Lun Ung, (Surrey Registry No. 106791-01)
This cased involved a charge of fishing for crabs in waters which were other than Canadian waters. At trial, expert evidence was lead with respect to the difficulty of determining one’s precise position in relation to the border because of such factors as the unreliability of range markers and global positioning systems and the difficulty of precise navigation in rough …
Full SummaryR v. Kavanagh, [2002] N.J. No. 124
This case involved a charge against a crab fisherman under s. 63(3) of the Fisheries Act of producing a fishing log with a misleading or false estimate of the size of his catch. Evidence was lead at trial that although discrepancy of 5 to 10 per cent was not uncommon, the actual catch of the fisherman was 33.6 per cent …
Full SummaryR v. Rideout, 2003 NSPC 5
This case involved a crab fisherman who was charged with contravening a condition of his licence that only allowed him to fish in sub-area 23d. At trial it was established that the accused was fishing outside sub-area 23d based upon a mistaken but honest belief that he was inside sub-area 23d. At issue in the case was the application of …
Full SummaryR v. Kinghorne, 2003 NBQB 341
This case involved a charge of having on board a fishing vessel scallops having more than the permitted average count of 45 meats per 500 grams. At trial a number of defences were raised including (1) illegal search, (2) due diligence, and (3) mistake of fact. With respect to the due diligence and mistake of fact defences, the accused unsuccessfully …
Full SummaryR v. Croft, 2003 NSCA 368
This case involved a fisherman who was charged with catching six undersize lobsters out of a total catch of 100 to 150 lbs of lobsters. Despite evidence that he used a properly calibrated measuring device, the trial judge rejected a due diligence defence and apparently a separate defence based upon the maxim de minimus non curat lex (the law does …
Full SummaryR v. Croft, 2004 NLSCTD 46
Not yet available.
Full Summary