R. v. Chabun, (1982) 39 A.R. 485 (NWTSC)

• Judge: de Weerdt, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Northwest Territories (Canada)
• Case Date: August 03, 1982
• Jurisdiction: Northwest Territories
• Citations: (1982), 39 A.R. 485 (NWTSC)

R. v. Chabun (1982), 39 A.R. 485 (NWTSC)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Chabun

(No. SC 2606)

Indexed As: R. v. Chabun

Northwest Territories Supreme Court

de Weerdt, J.

August 3, 1982

Summary:

An accused applied for prohibition and certiorari to terminate a prosecution by indictment. The accused was charged with two offences on separate informations. The Crown elected to proceed by way of summary conviction. The accused pleaded not guilty. The Crown stayed the proceedings and entered a new information charging the same offences and re-elected to proceed by indictment. The accused claimed that the prosecution by indictment was an abuse of process. The Northwest Territories Supreme Court dismissed the application.

Criminal Law - Topic 255

General principles - Abuse of process - Power of court to prevent an abuse of process and to grant an accused a stay of proceedings - The Northwest Territories Supreme Court generally discussed the power of a court of first instance, other than a superior court, to prevent an abuse of process - See paragraphs 10 to 12.

Criminal Law - Topic 253

General principles - Abuse of process - What constitutes oppressive or other conduct by Crown constituting abuse of process - An accused was charged with two offences on separate informations - The Crown elected to proceed by summary conviction - The accused pleaded guilty - The Crown stayed the proceedings and issued a new information charging the same offences and elected to proceed by indictment - The Northwest Territories Supreme Court held that the action taken by the Crown did not constitute an abuse of process - See paragraphs 6 to 9.

Administrative Law - Topic 6401

Judicial review - Prohibition - General principles - When available re criminal matters - The Northwest Territories Supreme Court stated that prohibition was not available to prevent an inferior court from exercising a jurisdiction, which it possessed under the law - See paragraph 12.

Administrative Law - Topic 5007

Judicial review - Certiorari - General principles - When available - Criminal matters - The Northwest Territories Supreme Court stated that certiorari was not available in a case where there was a remedy by way of appeal - See paragraph 12.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Atwood, [1972] 5 W.W.R. 600; 8 C.C.C.(2d) 147; reversing [1972] 4 W.W.R. 399; 7 C.C.C.(2d) 116 (N.W.T. Mag. Ct.), consd. [para. 7].

R. v. Panarctic Oils Limited (1982), 38 A.R. 447, refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Kowerchuk, [1972] 5 W.W.R. 255; 23 C.R.N.S. 55 (Alta. S.C.); affd. [1972] 5 W.W.R. 255n; 23 C.R.N.S. 56n (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Kowerchuk, [1971] 4 W.W.R. 564; 15 C.R.N.S. 95; 3 C.C.C.(2d) 291 (Alta. Prov. Ct.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Burns, Fairchild and Donnelly, [1975] 4 W.W.R. 305; 30 C.R.N.S. 387; 25 C.C.C.(2d) 391 (B.C.Co. Ct.); refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Scheller; R. v. Tomlinson et al. (1976), 37 C.R.N.S. 320; 32 C.C.C.(2d) 273 (Ont. P. C.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Buckley (1976), 38 C.R.N.S. 12 (Ont. C.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Dunlop (1977), 37 C.R.N.S. 261 (B.C. P.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Lebrun, [1979] 1 W.W.R. 764; 45 C.C.C.(2d) 300; 7 C.R.(3d) 93 (B.C.C.A.); refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Lizzee, [1978] 4 W.W.R. 736; 4 C.R.(3d) 115; 42 C.C.C.(2d) 173 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Rouke, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 1021, 16 N.R. 181; 76 D.L.R.(3d) 193; 35 C.C.C.(2d) 129; 38 C.R.N.S. 268; [1977] 5 W.W.R. 487, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Osborn, [1969] 1 O.R. 152; 4 C.C.C. 185; 1 D.L.R.(3d) 664 (Ont. C.A.); revd. [1971] S.C.R. 184; 15 D.L.R.(3d) 85; 1 C.C.C.(2d) 482, refd to. [para. 11].

Re Orysiuk and R., [1977] 6 W.W.R. 410; 37 C.C.C.(2d) 445; 1 C.R.(3d) 311, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Krannenberg (1980), 51 C.C.C.(2d) 205; 108 D.L.R.(3d) 333; 31 N.R. 206 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Bjorklund (1977), 39 C.R.N.S. 346 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Jones (1978), 4 C.R.(3d) 76 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

Haugen v. R. (1981), 21 C.R.(3d) 203 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

Rogers v. R. (1981), 22 C.R.(3d) 189 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 11].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982), sect. 7 [para. 11]; sect. 24 [para. 12].

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 233(1), sect. 236 [para. 2].

Counsel:

D.M. Cooper, for the applicant;

M. Zigayer, for the respondent.

This application was heard before de WEERDT, J., of the Northwest Territories Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on August 3, 1982: