R. v. Popovic and Askov, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 308 (1975)

Supreme Court of Canada

R. v. Popovic and Askov, [1976] 2 S.C.R. 308

Date: 1975-10-27

Her Majesty The Queen (Plaintiff) Appellant;

and

Nicholas Popovic and Elija Askov (Defendants) Respondents.

1975: March 20; 1975: October 27.

Present: Laskin C.J. and Martland, Judson, Spence, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz and de Grandpré JJ.

ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO.

Statutes-Interpretation-Ambiguities-Successive revisions in both French and English versions-Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, ss. 213, 306-Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. 1-23, s. 36.

Criminal law-Murder-Burglary-Meaning of "burglary"-Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, ss. 213, 306-Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. 1-23, s. 36.

At a jury trial in Toronto the respondents, together with Radco Govedarov and Sreto Dzambas, were found guilty of murder. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals of Govedarov and Dzambas but ordered a new trial for the respondents, since, in the opinion of the majority, the trial judge had erred in directing the jury that breaking into the restaurant should be considered as burglary within the meaning of s. 213 of the Criminal Code whereas, in their view, burglary meant breaking into a dwelling-house only. The subsequent appeal was taken only by virtue of the dissent in the Court of Appeal which relied particularly on the expression "vol avec effraction" used in the French text of s. 213.

Held (Judson and de Grandpré JJ. dissenting): The appeal should be dismissed.

Per Laskin C.J. and Martland, Spence, Pigeon, Dickson and Bee...

If you are already a vLex customer, Access Here