R. v. Chebib (Z.K.), (1998) 239 A.R. 373 (QB)

• Judge: Shannon, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: November 06, 1998
• Citations: (1998), 239 A.R. 373 (QB)

R. v. Chebib (Z.K.) (1998), 239 A.R. 373 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1999] A.R. TBEd. JA.064

Her Majesty The Queen (respondent) v. Ziad Khoder Chebib (appellant)

(Action No. Appeal No. 9801-0083s6)

Indexed As: R. v. Chebib (Z.K.)

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Calgary

Shannon, J.

November 6, 1998.

Summary:

An accused was convicted of operating an unlicensed taxi, carrying on business as a taxi broker while not being licensed and operating a taxi not equipped with a sealed meter. He was fined a total of $2,850. He appealed.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, set aside the convictions and ordered that the accused be reimbursed for the fines.

Editor's Note: for previous proceedings in this matter, see 190 A.R. 303 and 209 A.R. 288; 160 W.A.C. 288.

Criminal Law - Topic 80

General principles - Res judicata (multiple convictions for same subject matter pre­cluded) - Circumstances when defence may be raised - An accused was convicted of three violations of a municipal bylaw concerning taxis - He had already been convicted of contempt for failing to com­ply with an order directing him to comply with the bylaw - Details of the above three violations were used to support the con­tempt conviction - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench allowed the accused's appeal and set aside the convictions - The Kienapple rule applied - The same or substantially the same elements made up the contempt offence and the three bylaw offences - Therefore, he should not have been found guilty of the three additional bylaw offences.

Criminal Law - Topic 206

General principles - Common law defences - Double prosecution for same offence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 80 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Kienapple, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729; 1 N.R. 322; 15 C.C.C.(2d) 524; 44 D.L.R.(3d) 351, appld. [para. 4].

R. v. Grégoire (1980), 60 C.C.C.(2d) 542 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Loyer and Blouin, [1978] 2 S.C.R. 631; 21 N.R. 181; 40 C.C.C.(2d) 291; 85 D.L.R.(3d) 101, refd to. [para. 6].

Counsel:

Adel A. Abougoush, Q.C., and James E. Hittel, for the respondent;

Ziad Khoder Chebib, not represented by counsel.

This appeal was heard before Shannon, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial District of Calgary, who released the following reasons for judgment on Novem­ber 6, 1998.