Not yet available.
Full SummaryR v. Leahy, 2004 NSPC 62
P v. Diep, 2005 ABCA 54
This case involved a s. 8 Charter challenge of a warrantless inspection/search of a fish farm facility which in addition to finding unlicensed fish also discovered a large marijuana grow operation. The appeal court upheld the validity of the search for the following reasons: In R v. Jarvis [2002] 3 S.C.R. 757, the Supreme Court of Canada has said that …
Full SummaryR v. Kooktook, 2004 NUCJ 7
R v. King, 2008 PESCTD 18
Upon summary conviction appeal, the appeal court ruled that the act of waiting and watching some undersize lobster that had been discovered pursuant to a legal inspection under s. 49(1) of the Fisheries Act, "from within a warehouse, which was a limited access building that was used by a number of public agencies for various purposes" (para. 23) did not …
Full SummaryR v. Boudreau, 2009 NSPC 26
This case involved a motion during a trial to exclude a statement made by the accused to a fisheries officer. Prior to the making of the statement the accused had been given a Charter warning and had advised that he did not want to call a lawyer "at this time". Based upon the British Columbia Provincial Court decision of R. …
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. Q.M.P. Fisheries Ltd. et al, 2001 BCPC 210
This case involved charges of buying and selling salmon caught under the authority of a food fishing licence. This judgment was a ruling on a voice dire concerning the admissibility of documents seized under the authority of two search warrants issued under s. 487 of the Criminal Code. The court reviewed the affidavits filed in support of the affidavits and …
Full SummaryR v. McDonald, 2002 NSCA 135
This case involved an application under s. 71(4) of the Fisheries Act on behalf of a number of First Nations fishermen to have seized gear returned pending trial on charges of illegal fishing. At issue was whether or not the Crown had to make application under s. 71(4) of the Act if they wished to retain seized gear for more …
Full Summary- Page 2 of 2
- 1
- 2