-

R v. Balsom, 2014 CanLII 72869 (NL PC)

In Fish Cases, Forfeiture, Offences on (Updated )

This case involved a a 71 year old man who was caught setting a net across a creek from which three trout were retrieved. He was fined $3,000 for illegally fishing with a net and $1,000 for illegal possession of three trout. After reviewing a number of authorities regarding forfeitures under the Fisheries Act and concluding that it had the …

Full Summary
- - - - -

R v. v. May, 2013 CanLII 8665 (NL PC)

In Fish Cases, Forfeiture, Offences on (Updated )

This case involved a fish harvester caught with crab caught under a improperly marked buoy. The crab was seized and sold for $6,832.80. After reviewing the applicable authorities including R v. Rideout, [2005] N.S.J. nO. 9 (N.S.S.C.) (digested herein), the court concluded that since it is possible that all the elements of the offence could have been established before any …

Full Summary
- -

R v. Gould, No. 318 (NFLD. Sup.Ct.)

In Fish Cases, Forfeiture, Offences on (Updated )

This was a sentencing case involving two brothers who pleaded guilty of unlawful possession of salmon. Both brothers were fined $1,000 dollars. In the court also ordered the forfeiture of the boat owned by one brother with a value of $12,000 dollars. Upon appeal, the court set aside the forfeiture of the vessel and substituted an additional fine of $500 …

Full Summary
- -

R v. Cox

Forsey, N.J. No.264 (Nfld. Prov. Ct.)

In Fish Cases, Forfeiture, Offences on (Updated )

This case involved two accuseds, who were convicted of taking an illegal bycatch of cod and other species while fishing for skate. The court considered section 51(b) of the Fisheries Act and exercised its discretion to not order forfeiture of intermixed fish. In exercising this discretion it considered, amongst other things, the following: 1) The problem of cod bycatch adversely …

Full Summary
-

R v. Weir, N.J. No. 4 (NFLD. S.C.)

In Fish Cases, Forfeiture, Offences on (Updated )

This case involved an appeal from a sentence imposed for fishing cod during a closed time. Upon appeal, the court upheld a crown appeal of an $800 fine as too low and set aside a forfeiture of boat and motor belonging to one of the accuseds. In doing so, Dymond J. reviewed some of the prior authorities and said as …

Full Summary
-

R v. Hudson, 2000 PESCTD 18

In Fish Cases, Forfeiture, Offences on (Updated )

This was a sentence appeal involving an accused with a lengthy record who was convicted for illegal fishing of Lobster. Amongst other things, the court upheld an order for forfeiture of a dory, outboard motor and other miscellaneous items with an estimated value of $2,500.

Full Summary
-

R v. Sandover-Sly, [2000] BCCA 445

In Fish Cases, Forfeiture, Offences on (Updated )

This case involved an appeal from a sentence for fishing for abalone without a licence, which imposed forfeiture of a tug and barge used in the commission of the offence in addition to a fine. Although the appellant was the general manager of the Company that owned the tug and barge, it was his father who was the sole beneficiary …

Full Summary
- -

R v. Cobb, 2002 CanLII 53998

In Fish Cases, Forfeiture, Offences on (Updated )

The case involved an application under s. 75(1) of the Fisheries Act for return of a boat that had been forfeited pursuant to s. 72(1) of the Act. Although the act provided that the application must be made within 30 days after the forfeiture, the application was not made until 43 days after the forfeiture. Upon the Crown making a …

Full Summary