R. v. Wijesinha, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 422 (1995)

Extract

---

R. v. Wijesinha, [1995] 3 S.C.R. 422 (1995)

R. v. Wijesinha, [1995] 3

S.C.R. 422

Walter Kingsley Kirti Wijesinha Appellant v.

Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

Indexed as: R. v. Wijesinha

File No.: 24015.

Hearing and judgment: May 31, 1995.

Reasons delivered: September 21, 1995.

Present: Lamer C.J. and La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.

on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario

Criminal law -- Obstruction of justice -- Law Society investigation -- False declarations made on behalf of and at behest of person under investigation -- Whether or not obstruction of justice -- Whether or not term "course of justice" includes investigations -- Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46, ss. 118, 139(1), (2), (3).

Constitutional law -- Charter of Rights -- Admissibility -- Bringing administration of justice into disrepute -- Infringement of right against unreasonable search and seizure -- Tapes of conversations made without warrant but with consent of one of the parties pursuant to current legal advice conceded to infringe s. 8 right to freedom from unreasonable search and seizure -- Whether or not admission of tapes would bring administration of justice into disrepute -- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 8.

Trial -- Privilege -- Solicitor-client privilege -- Privilege claimed in false affidavits made in response to Law Society investigation -- Affidavits prepared to further criminal purpose of obstructing justice -- Whether or not privilege attaching to documents.

Appellant, a lawyer, offered to pay a police officer a referral fee for every client retained after failing a breathalyzer test. The constable reported the appellant's proposition to his superiors. A police investigation confirmed, by conversations intercepted through the use of a body pack, that three persons referred had been retained and that another officer was involved in the scheme. The police were given legal advice that this type of interception was constitutionally valid and that no criminal offence was being committed as long as witnesses were not being subverted. The police investigators called the Law Society Discipline Committee for advice, and although the police did not pursue their investigation of the appellant, they continued to communicate with and supply information to the Law Society.

The Law Society commenced its own investigation. It advised the appellant of the nature of his alleged misconduct, gave him details of the evidence and invited him to respond. The officer involved in the scheme and the three referral clients complied with appellant's request that they sign statutory declarations prepared by him. The statutory declarations sworn by the three clients denied being directed to the appellant by a police officer. The one sworn by the officer ...

See the full content of this document

If you are already a vLex customer, access here

---