R. v. Burns Food Ltd. et al., (1983) 42 A.R. 70 (ProvCt)

Judge:Cioni, J.
Court:Provincial Court (Alberta)
Case Date:February 17, 1983
Jurisdiction:Alberta
Citations:(1983), 42 A.R. 70 (ProvCt)
 
FREE EXCERPT

R. v. Burns Foods Ltd. (1983), 42 A.R. 70 (ProvCt)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Burns Foods Limited, Burns Meats Ltd., Canada Packers Inc., Eschem Canada Inc., Gainers Limited, and Intercontinental Packers Limited

Indexed As: R. v. Burns Food Ltd. et al.

Alberta Provincial Court

Judicial District of Calgary

Cioni, J.

February 17, 1983.

Summary:

The accused meat packers were charged with conspiring to lessen competition on the hog and hog products market. The Crown's theory was that the accused used and subverted the buying procedures of the Alberta Hog Producers Marketing Board, making the Board's activities and records central to the proceedings. The accused sought production of the Board's records of daily sales, particularly the daily tapes of the teletype selling machine with supporting records.

The Alberta Provincial Court allowed the motion for the production of the daily tapes for the whole period covered by the charges against the accused.

Criminal Law - Topic 3582

Preliminary inquiry - Evidence - Production of documents referred to by Crown witnesses - The accused meat packers were charged with conspiring to lessen competition on the hog and hog products market - The activities and records of the Alberta Hog Producers Marketing Board were central to the Crown's case - At the preliminary hearing the Crown relied on one day's tapes of the teletype selling machine - The Alberta Provincial Court allowed the accused's motion for production of the daily tapes for the whole period covered by the charges against the accused.

Evidence - Topic 1586

Hearsay rule exceptions - Business records - Regular entries - Computer or machine-made records - The Alberta Provincial Court held that records of the Alberta Hog Producers Marketing Board, including computer printouts, microfilm, micro-magnetic tape and punch cards, were admissible - See paragraphs 10 to 12.

Evidence - Topic 1587

Hearsay rule exceptions - Business records - Regular entries - Summaries of records - The Alberta Provincial Court held that summaries of business records were admissible, but ordered production of the original or supporting records upon which the summaries were based - See paragraphs 10 to 11.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Patterson (1970), 72 W.W.R.(N.S.) 35 (S.C.C.) consd. [para. 5].

R. v. Ferrero (1981), 29 A.R. 469; 21 C.R.(3d) 376 (Alta. C.A.), consd. [para. 5].

R. v. Depagie (1976), 1 A.R. 602; 32 C.C.C.(2d) 89 (Alta. C.A.), cond. [para. 5].

R. v. Solloway and Mills (1930), 53 C.C.C. 180 (Alta. C.A.), consd. [para. 5].

R. v. Churchman and Durham (1954), 111 C.C.C. 382 (O.H.C.), consd. [para. 5].

Omand v. Alberta Milling Company, [1922] 3 W.W.R. 412 (Alta. C.A.), consd. [para. 5].

Ares v. Venner (1970), 73 W.W.R.(N.S.) 347 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 5].

C.P.R. v. City of Calgary, [1971] 4 W.W.R. 241 (Alta. C.A.), consd. [para. 5].

R. v. Scheel (1978), 3 C.R.(3d) 359 (O.C.A.), consd. [para. 5].

McDaniel v. U.S., 343 F. 2d 785 (1965) (U.S.C.A.), consd. [para. 5.].

R. v. Vanlergerghe (1976), 6 C.R.(3d) 222 (B.C.C.A.), consd. [para. 5].

R. v. McMullen (1978), 6 C.R.(3d) 218 (O.S.C.), consd. [para. 5.].

U.S. v. Russo, 480 F. 2d 1228 (1973) (U.S.C.A.), consd. [para. 5].

United States of America v. Sheppard (1976), 9 N.R. 215; 30 C.C.C.(2d) 424 (S.C.C.), consd. [para. 5].

Statutes Noticed:

Canada Evidence Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. E-10, sect. 30(1), sect. 30(5) [para. 5].

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 465(1), sect. 468(1), sect. 469(4) [para. 5].

Counsel:

P.J. McCaffery, Q.C., G. Bourgard and P.J. Vautour for the Crown;

R.K. Laking and J. Strekof, for the accused, Burns Foods Ltd. and Burns Meats Ltd.;

J.E. Redmond, Q.C., and B. Zalmanowitz, for the accused, Canada Packers Inc.;

J.W. Rowley, Q.C., and J.C. Osborne for the accused, Eschem Canada Ltd.;

M.G. Stevens-Guille and D.T. Carrol, for the accused, Gainers Limited;

P.H. Ferguson, for the accused, Intercontinental Packers Limited.

This case was heard at Calgary, Alberta before CIONI, J., of the Alberta Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on February 17, 1983:

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP