R. v. Arenburg, (1989) 91 N.S.R.(2d) 168 (CA)
| Judge | Macdonald, Matthews and Chipman, JJ.A. |
| Court | Supreme Court of Nova Scotia (Canada) |
| Case Date | June 02, 1989 |
| Jurisdiction | Nova Scotia |
| Citations | (1989), 91 N.S.R.(2d) 168 (CA) |
R. v. Arenburg (1989), 91 N.S.R.(2d) 168 (CA);
233 A.P.R. 168
MLB headnote and full text
Her Majesty the Queen (appellant) v. Robert George Arenburg (respondent)
(S.C.C. No. 02016)
Indexed As: R. v. Arenburg
Nova Scotia Supreme Court
Appeal Division
Macdonald, Matthews and Chipman, JJ.A.
June 2, 1989.
Summary:
The accused fisherman appealed his conviction for violating a condition of his licence by taking an excessive amount of a prohibited species.
The Nova Scotia County Court, in a judgment reported 87 N.S.R.(2d) 164; 222 A.P.R. 174, allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused on the ground that the Crown failed to prove a variation order establishing the species as prohibited. The Crown appealed.
The Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Appeal Division, dismissed the appeal.
Fish and Game - Topic 2173
Fishing offences - Fishing prohibited species - The accused fisherman was charged with taking pollock, a prohibited species, in excess of permitted quantities - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal affirmed the accused's acquittal on the ground that the Crown failed to prove a variation order establishing pollock as a prohibited species.
Fish and Game - Topic 2194
Fishing offences - Licences - Variation orders - Proof of - [See Fish and Game - Topic 2173 above].
Statutes Noticed:
Fisheries Act Regulations, Atlantic Fishery Regulations, sect. 33(2) [para. 5]; sect. 87 [para. 11]; sect. 88(1), sect. 88(2) [para. 9].
Atlantic Fishery Regulations - see Fisheries Act Regulations.
Counsel:
Michael A. Pare, for the appellant;
S. Clifford Hood, Q.C., for the respondent.
This appeal was heard on May 12, 1989, before Macdonald, Matthews and Chipman, JJ.A., of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court, Appeal Division.
On June 2, 1989, Macdonald, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the Court of Appeal.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R. v. Boudreau (D.P.) (No. 1), (1989) 93 N.S.R.(2d) 193 (CA)
...made it unnecessary for the Crown to prove the underlying authority for the variation orders. Cases Noticed: R. v. Arenburg (1989), 91 N.S.R.(2d) 168; 233 A.P.R. 168, dist. [para. S. Clifford Hood, for the appellant; Michael A. Pare, for the respondent Crown. This case was heard on Septembe......
-
R. v. Potter, (1990) 95 N.S.R.(2d) 295 (CA)
...Kienapple, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729; 1 N.R. 322; 44 D.L.R.(3d) 351; 15 C.C.C.(2d) 524; 26 C.R.N.S. 1, refd to. [para. 3]. R. v. Arenburg (1989), 91 N.S.R.(2d) 168; 233 A.P.R. 168, appld. [para. Statutes Noticed: Atlantic Fishery Regulations - see Fisheries Act Regulations. Fisheries Act Regulati......
-
R. v. Boudreau (D.P.) (No. 1), (1989) 93 N.S.R.(2d) 193 (CA)
...made it unnecessary for the Crown to prove the underlying authority for the variation orders. Cases Noticed: R. v. Arenburg (1989), 91 N.S.R.(2d) 168; 233 A.P.R. 168, dist. [para. S. Clifford Hood, for the appellant; Michael A. Pare, for the respondent Crown. This case was heard on Septembe......
-
R. v. Potter, (1990) 95 N.S.R.(2d) 295 (CA)
...Kienapple, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729; 1 N.R. 322; 44 D.L.R.(3d) 351; 15 C.C.C.(2d) 524; 26 C.R.N.S. 1, refd to. [para. 3]. R. v. Arenburg (1989), 91 N.S.R.(2d) 168; 233 A.P.R. 168, appld. [para. Statutes Noticed: Atlantic Fishery Regulations - see Fisheries Act Regulations. Fisheries Act Regulati......