Johnson v. R., (1991) 44 O.A.C. 249 (CA)

• Judge: Robins, Catzman and Doherty, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: April 04, 1991
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (1991), 44 O.A.C. 249 (CA);1991 CanLII 7174 (ON CA);3 OR (3d) 49;4 CR (4th) 378;64 CCC (3d) 20;[1991] OJ No 481 (QL);12 WCB (2d) 707;44 OAC 249;6 CRR (2d) 180

Johnson v. R. (1991), 44 O.A.C. 249 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. Maureen Johnson (appellant)

(961/90)

Indexed As: Johnson v. R.

Ontario Court of Appeal

Robins, Catzman and Doherty, JJ.A.

April 4, 1991.

Summary:

The accused's common law wife was subpoenaed to testify against him. The wife applied to quash the subpoena, claiming spousal immunity under s. 4(1) of the Canada Evidence Act.

The Ontario Supreme Court dismissed the application. The court held that s. 4(1) did not apply to common law spouses and was not contrary to s. 15 of the Charter. The wife appealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the ground that the application was premature. The court stated that the issue should be resolved by the trial judge if and when the wife was called as a Crown witness.

Civil Rights - Topic 8585

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Practice - Time for deciding Charter issues - [See Evidence - Topic 5505].

Evidence - Topic 5505

Witnesses - Competency and compellability - Time for objection - A common law wife subpoenaed to testify against her accused husband applied to quash the subpoena on the ground of spousal immunity (Canada Evidence Act, s. 4(1)) - The Ontario Supreme Court ruled s. 4(1) did not apply to common law spouses and did not violate s. 15 of the Charter - The accused was not yet tried - The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal on the ground that the issue should be resolved at trial if and when the wife was called as a Crown witness - The court stated that there were no "special circumstances" justifying pretrial resolution of the issue - Compellability should be decided when the witness is called to testify.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. A, B and C, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 995; 108 N.R. 214; 55 C.C.C.(3d) 562, refd to. [para. 6].

Regina and Vanguard Hutterian Brethren Inc., Re, [1979] 4 W.W.R. 173; 46 C.C.C.(2d) 389 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

Crooks and The Queen, Re (1982), 2 C.C.C.(3d) 57; 39 O.R.(2d) 193 (H.C.), affd. (1982), 2 C.C.C.(3d) 64; 143 D.L.R.(3d) 64 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. X (1983), 8 C.C.C.(3d) 87; 43 O.R.(2d) 685 (H.C.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Stupp et al. (1982), 2 C.C.C.(3d) 111; 32 C.R.(3d) 168 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Mills, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863; 67 N.R. 241; 16 O.A.C. 81; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Rahey, [1987] 1 S.C.R. 588; 75 N.R. 81; 78 N.S.R.(2d) 183; 193 A.P.R. 183; 33 C.C.C.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 6].

Gamble v. R., [1988] 2 S.C.R. 595; 89 N.R. 161; 45 C.C.C.(3d) 204, refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Whitmore and Carmichael (1989), 35 O.A.C. 373; 51 C.C.C.(3d) 294 (C.A.), affing. (1987), 41 C.C.C.(3d) 555 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Corbeil (1986), 13 O.A.C. 382; 27 C.C.C.(3d) 245; 24 C.C.R. 174 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

Krakowski and The Queen, Re (1983), 4 C.C.C.(3d) 188; 146 D.L.R.(3d) 760 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

Potma and The Queen, Re (1983), 2 C.C.C.(3d) 383; 144 D.L.R.(3d) 620 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

Anson and The Queen, Re (1983), 4 C.C.C.(3d) 119; 146 D.L.R.(3d) 661 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Kendall; R. v. McCaffery (1982), 42 A.R. 183; 2 C.C.C.(3d) 224; 144 D.L.R.(3d) 185 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

Thatcher and Merchant v. Lindskog, Bellerose, J., and Saskatchewan (Attorney General) (1983), 27 Sask.R. 68; 7 C.C.C.(3d) 446; 1 D.L.R.(4th) 763 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Morgentaler et al. (1984), 16 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 41 C.R.(3d) 262, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Meltzer and Laison, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1764; 96 N.R. 391; 49 C.C.C.(3d) 453, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Czipps (1979), 48 C.C.C.(2d) 166; 12 C.R.(3d) 193 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Bailey (1983), 4 C.C.C.(3d) 21; 32 C.R.(3d) 337 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

McNamara and The Queen, Re (1978), 12 C.R.(3d) 246 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

Regina and Mann, Re, [1971] 5 W.W.R. 84; 4 C.C.C.(2d) 319 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Hawke (1975), 22 C.C.C.(2d) 19; C.R.N.S. 1 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Logan (1988), 30 O.A.C. 152; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 567; 65 O.R.(2d) 717, refd to. [para. 10].

Chase and The Queen, Re (1982), 1 C.C.C.(3d) 188; 142 D.L.R.(3d) 507 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

Arrigo and The Queen, Re (1986), 29 C.C.C.(3d) 77 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

Ex parte Côté, [1972] 1 W.W.R. 737; 5 C.C.C.(2d) 49 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Jackson (1981), 46 N.S.R.(2d) 92; 89 A.P.R. 92; 61 C.C.C.(2d) 540; 23 C.R.(3d) 4 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Salituro (1990), 38 O.A.C. 241; 56 C.C.C.(3d) 350; 78 C.R.(3d) 68 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. Askov, Hussey, Melo and Gugliotta, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1199; 113 N.R. 241; 42 O.A.C. 81; 59 C.C.C.(3d) 449, refd to. [para. 18].

Statutes Noticed:

Canada Evidence Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-5, sect. 4(1) [para. 2].

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 15, sect. 24(1).

Counsel:

Maureen Forestell and Paul Rosen, for the appellant;

Jeff Casey, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on March 20, 1991, before Robins, Catzman and Doherty, JJ.A., of the Ontario Court of Appeal.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by Doherty, J.A., and released on April 4, 1991.