R. v. Asham, (1979) 1 Sask.R. 169 (CA)

Judge:Woods, Hall and Bayda, JJ.A.
Court:Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan
Case Date:November 27, 1979
Jurisdiction:Saskatchewan
Citations:(1979), 1 Sask.R. 169 (CA)
 
FREE EXCERPT

R. v. Asham (1979), 1 Sask.R. 169 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Asham

(No. 8607)

Indexed As: R. v. Asham

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Woods, Hall and Bayda, JJ.A.

November 27, 1979.

Summary:

This case arose out of the calculation of the date that a prison inmate was eligible for release. The inmate, while on mandatory supervision, committed five offences. The prison authorities calculated that the inmate was not eligible for release until May 1980. The inmate applied to the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench which ordered the release of the inmate. The release order was based on the substitution of an amended s. 20 of the Parole Act for s. 21 of the Parole Act which was repealed. The Crown appealed to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and set aside the order for release of the inmate. The Court of Appeal held that the amended s. 20 of the Parole Act was not enacted in substitution of the repealed s. 21 of the Parole Act.

An application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was dismissed on December 17, 1979 - see Bulletin of Proceedings taken in the Supreme Court of Canada dated December 21, 1979 at page 2.

Statutes - Topic 6299

Operation and effect - Effect on earlier statutes - Substitutions - What constitutes a substitution - A prison inmate was released on mandatory supervision - The inmate was convicted of five offences committed during the period of mandatory supervision - The prison authorities calculated that the inmate was not eligible for release until May 1980 - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench ordered the release of the inmate based on a substitution of an amended s. 20 of the Parole Act for s. 21 of the Parole Act which was repealed - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that the amended s. 20 was not enacted in substitution of s. 21 and, accordingly, s. 20 did not affect the calculation of the date that the inmate was eligible for release - See paragraph 9.

Statutes - Topic 6703

Operation and effect - Commencement, duration and repeal - Retrospective enactments - What constitutes retrospective operation - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal interpreted s. 20 of the Parole Act and stated that it did not operate retrospectively - See paragraphs 8 and 10.

Cases Noticed:

Ex parte Kaduke (1974), 19 C.C.C.(2d) 298, folld. [para. 9].

Statutes Noticed:

Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. I-23, sect. 35 [para. 10].

Criminal Law Amendment Act, S.C. 1976-77, c. 53, sect. 30 [para. 6].

Parole Act, R.S.C. 1979, 1st Supp., c. 31, sect. 17 [para. 4]; sect. 20 [para. 8]; sect. 21 [para. 4].

Counsel:

Barry D. Collins, Q.C., for the Crown;

William J. Wardell, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard by WOODS, HALL and BAYDA, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal on November 23, 1979.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by HALL, J.A., at Regina, Saskatchewan, on November 27, 1979.

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP