Cohen and Attorney General of Quebec, Re, (1979) 27 N.R. 344 (SCC)

• Judge: Martland, Ritchie, Pigeon, Beetz, Estey, Pratte and McIntyre, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: March 12, 1979
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1979), 27 N.R. 344 (SCC);1979 CanLII 198 (SCC);[1979] 1 SCR 683;13 CR (3d) 36;97 DLR (3d) 193;1979 CanLII 223 (SCC);[1979] SCJ No 50 (QL);46 CCC (2d) 473;[1979] CarswellQue 21;[1979] ACS no 50;[1979] 2 SCR 305;27 NR 344

Cohen, Re (1979), 27 N.R. 344 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

Re Cohen and Attorney General of Quebec

Indexed As: Cohen and Attorney General of Quebec, Re

Supreme Court of Canada

Martland, Ritchie, Pigeon, Beetz, Estey, Pratte and McIntyre, JJ.

June 14, 1979.

Summary:

This case arose out of a charge of obstructing justice contrary to s. 127(2) of the Criminal Code. At a preliminary inquiry the trial judge refused to permit cross-examination of a Crown witness on a prior written statement by the witness. The accused applied to the Quebec Superior Court for a writ of certiorari to quash the decision of the trial judge respecting the cross-examination of the Crown witness. The Quebec Superior Court allowed the application and issued an order of certiorari. The Crown appealed to the Quebec Court of Appeal.

The Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment of the Quebec Superior Court. The Crown appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Quebec Court of Appeal and quashed the writ of certiorari issued by the Quebec Superior Court. The Supreme Court of Canada held that certiorari respecting a preliminary inquiry lies only for lack of jurisdiction and that a decision concerning the admissibility of evidence, even if erroneous, does not affect jurisdiction.

Criminal Law - Topic 3604

Preliminary inquiry - Judicial review of committal order - Certiorari - During a preliminary inquiry the judge refused to permit cross-examination of a Crown witness on a prior written statement by the witness - The Quebec Court of Appeal affirmed the issue of an order of certiorari to quash the trial judge's refusal to permit such cross-examination - The Supreme Court of Canada set aside the order of certiorari on the ground that certiorari respecting a preliminary inquiry lies only for lack of jurisdiction and that a decision concerning the admissibility of evidence, even if erroneous, does not affect jurisdiction.

Cases Noticed:

Patterson v. The Queen, [1970] S.C.R. 409, folld. [paras. 3 and 12].

R. v. Mahony, [1910] 2 I.R. 695, refd to. [paras. 5 and 14].

R. v. Norgren (1975), 27 C.C.C.(2d) 488, refd to. [paras. 5 and 14].

Counsel:

Yves Berthiaume, for the appellant;

Jeff Boro, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard by MARTLAND, RITCHIE, PIGEON, BEETZ, ESTEY, PRATTE and McINTYRE, JJ. of the Supreme Court of Canada at Ottawa, Ontario on March 12, 1979. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada was delivered by PIGEON, J. on June 14, 1979 (see paragraphs 1 to 9 for English language version and paragraphs 10 to 18 for French language version).