Mentiplay v. Redekopp and Mennonite Trust Co., (1985) 39 Sask.R. 178 (ProvCt)

• Judge: Nutting, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: April 17, 1985
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1985), 39 Sask.R. 178 (ProvCt)

Mentiplay v. Redekopp (1985), 39 Sask.R. 178 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

Mentiplay v. Redekopp and Mennonite Trust Company

Indexed As: Mentiplay v. Redekopp and Mennonite Trust Co.

Saskatchewan Provincial Court

Judicial Centre of Saskatoon

Nutting, P.C.J.

April 17, 1985.

Summary:

The accused were charged in several informations with unlawfully performing work for a fee in matters pertaining to the law, contrary to s. 5(2) of the Legal Profession Act. Prior to plea, the accused moved to quash the informations, on the ground, inter alia, that the informations did not comply with s. 510 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court agreed with the accused and quashed the informations for noncompliance with s. 510.

Trials - Topic 1085

Summary convictions - Informations - Description of charge or offence - Several informations charged the accused with "unlawfully performing work for a fee in matters pertaining to the law, to wit perform work on behalf of (named vendors and one purchaser)" - There was no specific description of the legal work done, thus the illegal act or omission of the accused was not detailed - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court quashed the informations, because there were insufficient details of the circumstances of the alleged offence as required by s. 510 of the Criminal Code of Canada - See paragraphs 4 to 11.

Trials - Topic 1087

Summary convictions - Informations - Requirement that offence be contrary to law - The accused were charged with "unlawfully performing work for a fee in matters pertaining to the law ...", contrary to s. 5(2) of the Legal Profession Act - The accused alleged a failure to disclose an offence known to law, because the informations did not aver that the accused were not lawyers - The Saskatchewan Provincial Court applied s. 730 of the Criminal Code of Canada and held that the informant was not required to negative the exception to an offence under s. 5 - See paragraph 3.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Matovich (1984), 32 Sask.R. 202, refd to. [para. 2].

R. v. Dahlem (1983), 25 Sask.R. 10, refd to. [para. 3].

Statutes Noticed:

Legal Profession Act, R.S.S. 1978, c. L-10, sect. 5(1)(e) [para. 7].

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 510(3) [paras 5, 10-11]; sect. 730 [para. 3].

Counsel:

D. Albert Lavoie, Q.C., for the Crown;

Drew Plaxton, for the defendant.

This motion was heard before Nutting, P.C.J., of the Saskatchewan Provincial Court, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, whose decision was delivered at Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, on April 17, 1985.