Ontario Handgun Association et al. v. Ontario (Solicitor General) et al., (1993) 67 O.A.C. 359 (DC)

• Judge: Montgomery, J.
• Court: Ontario Court of Justice General Division (Canada)
• Case Date: October 01, 1993
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1993), 67 O.A.C. 359 (DC)

Handgun Assoc. v. Ont. (1993), 67 O.A.C. 359 (DC)

MLB headnote and full text

In The Matter Of the decision of the Solicitor General for Ontario and Minister of Correctional Services dated June 30, 1993 to not designate any shooting competitions;

And In The Matter Of Sections 84(1)(f), 90(3.2) and 90.1 of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 as amended;

And In The Matter Of the Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations, S.O.R./92-460 as amended by S.O.R./93-366;

And In The Matter Of the 90 day Amnesty of the Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations implemented by the Attorney General for Canada (Minister of Justice) from July 1, 1993 pursuant to section 91.1 of the Criminal Code being SOR/93-367;

And In The Matter Of the 90 day concurrent administrative grace period of the Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations introduced by the Solicitor General for Ontario as of June 30, 1993;

And In The Matter Of the Judicial Review Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. J-1

Ontario Handgun Association, International Practical Shooting Confederation, Service Rifle Association, Ontario Arms Collectors' Association and F.W. Lorne Rowe (applicants) v. Solicitor General for Ontario, Attorney General for Canada and Solicitor General of Canada (respondents)

(No. 607/93)

Indexed As: Ontario Handgun Association et al. v. Ontario (Solicitor General) et al.

Ontario Court of Justice

General Division

Divisional Court

Montgomery, J.

October 8, 1993.

Summary:

The owners of large capacity car­tridge magazines, which were pro­hibited under the Cartridge Maga­zine Control Regulations, sought judicial review of the decision by the Attorney General of Ontario not to designate any shooting competi­tions within Ontario, which had the effect of depriving the owners of an exemption from prosecution. The owners applied for an interim injun­ction under the Judicial Review Procedure Act pending judicial review.

The Ontario Divisional Court, per Montgomery, J., dismissed the appli­cation.

Injunctions - Topic 7078

Particular matters - Violation of statute - Criminal statute - Crim­inal Code - Pos­session of large capacity cartridge maga­zines was prohibited under the Cartridge Magazine Control Regulations as part of the federal government's gun control plan - Owners of these magazines who used them in shoot­ing competitions were subject to criminal prosecution, loss of the maga­zines and possible imprison­ment - They could not qualify for an exemption where no designation of shooting competitions had been made by the Ontario Solicitor Gen­eral - The Ontario Divisional Court, per Montgomery, J., refused to issue an interim injun­ction prohibiting prosecution pen­ding judicial review - The court found the owners were not subject to irreparable harm, where they had a choice to comply with the law, and the balance of conveni­ence favoured the Crown.

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 7 [paras. 10, 13].

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 84(1)(f) [para. 2]; sect. 90(3.2) [paras. 4, 5].

Judicial Review Procedure Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. J-1, sect. 4 [para. 1].

Counsel:

Harry Black, Q.C., and Joanne Mulcahy, for the applicants;

Leslie McIntosh and Robert Charney, for the respondent, Solicitor General for Ontario;

John Nagy and Mark Persuad, for the respondents, Attorney General for Canada and Solicitor General of Canada.

This appeal was heard on October 1, 1993, before Montgomery, J., of the Ontario Divi­sional Court, who released the following oral decision on October 8, 1993.