Digest: R v B.N. Steel & Metal (2002) Inc., 2017 SKPC 14

DateFebruary 17, 2019

Reported as: 2017 SKPC 14

Docket Number: PC17147 , 90215170

Court: Provincial Court

Date: 2019-02-17


  • Klause


  • Municipal Law � Bylaw � Breach � Evidence
  • Statutes � Interpretation � Personal information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, Section 7

Digest: The accused, B.N. Steel & Metal, operated a scrap metal yard. It was charged pursuant to City of Saskatoon Bylaw No. 6066 that it had failed to report information it was required to submit to the Saskatoon Police Service (SPS) as required by s. 39(e). The bylaw had been in existence since 1981 to govern the operation of scrap metal businesses as well as other commercial enterprises who purchased secondhand materials. Section 39 sets out that any person carrying on such businesses has to keep a record that identifies the name, address, description and vehicle licence number of anyone who sells property to it. This information with respect to all goods, articles or things purchased the preceding day is to be delivered by the business to the Chief of Police. The information is to be provided on cards supplied by the police. In 2012, the SPS started investigating metal theft being perpetrated by crystal meth users to get cash to support their drug use. The officer in charge of the investigation wanted to have a bylaw drafted that would require scrap metal yards to start reporting and discovered the existence of Bylaw No. 6066. A meeting was held with the representatives of the three scrap metal yards in Saskatoon to discuss reporting because of the problem the police were endeavouring to solve. The officer realized that the bylaw as drafted was neither viable nor appropriate, but he reached an agreement with the representatives that they would report their sales via a software program, not through the cards stipulated in the bylaw. The record would include the seller�s name, address, driver�s licence and plate number, eye colour, height and details regarding the metal purchased. Reporting began that year, but after two years, reports were not being submitted daily and were not as complete. On June 18, 2015, the officer decided to charge B.N. for non-compliance with the bylaw�s reporting requirements between June 15 and 18. The defence attacked the charge on two grounds: 1) by way of a constitutional challenge to the validity of the bylaw because it was in conflict with the paramount federal legislation, the Personal Information Protection and...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT