R. v. Connor, (1990) 98 N.S.R.(2d) 356 (ProvCt)

• Judge: Niedermayer, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: October 09, 1990
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (1990), 98 N.S.R.(2d) 356 (ProvCt)

R. v. Connor (1990), 98 N.S.R.(2d) 356 (ProvCt);

    263 A.P.R. 356

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Bradford Scott Connor

Indexed As: R. v. Connor

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Niedermayer, P.C.J.

October 9, 1990.

Summary:

The accused was charged with several counts of unlawful parking on Department of National Defence property contrary to the Government Property Traffic Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. G-6, and Regulations thereunder. The issue arose of whether the certificate of the Nova Scotia Registrar of Motor Vehicles was admissible without notice.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court held that the certificate was not admissible without notice.

Evidence - Topic 1687

Hearsay rule exceptions - Official statements - Certificates - Notice of intent to offer - The accused was charged with unlawfully parking under the Government Property Traffic Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. G-6 - The Canada Evidence Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-5, s. 48, provided that certificates, e.g. a certificate of motor vehicle ownership registration, was admissible only upon notice - Section 40, however, provided that provincial laws of evidence applied to proceedings under federal statutes - The Motor Vehicle Act, R.S.N.S. 1967, c. 191, s. 264(2), provided that a certificate was admissible and required no notice - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court held that a certificate of vehicle ownership was inadmissible against the accused without notice.

Motor Vehicles - Topic 4203

Offences - Evidence - Documents - Admissibility - Notice of offer of - Conflict between federal and provincial requirements - [See Evidence - Topic 1687].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Wilkinson (1978), 5 C.C.C.(3d) 278 (B.C.C.A.), consd. [para. 9].

R. v. Porter; R. v. Layton (1979), 51 C.C.C.(2d) 331 (B.C.C.A.), consd. [para. 9].

R. v. Albright, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 383; 79 N.R. 129; 37 C.C.C.(3d) 105, consd. [para. 9].

R. v. Richardson (1980), 26 A.R. 558; 57 C.C.C.(2d) 403 (C.A.), consd. [para. 11].

R. v. Yerxa (1978), 21 N.B.R.(2d) 569; 37 A.P.R. 569; 42 C.C.C.(2d) 117 (C.A.), consd. [para. 12].

R. v. Tatomir (1989), 99 A.R. 188; 51 C.C.C.(3d) 321 (C.A.), consd. [para. 12].

R. v. Veinotte (1986), 75 N.S.R.(2d) 179; 186 A.P.R. 179 (C.A.), consd. [para. 12].

Statutes Noticed:

Canada Evidence Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-5, sect. 24 [para. 3]; sect. 28 [para. 4]; sect. 40 [para. 5].

Evidence Act (Can.) - see Canada Evidence Act.

Government Property Traffic Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. G-6.

Motor Vehicle Act, R.S.N.S. 1967, c. 191, sect. 264(2) [para. 6].

Counsel:

Vivre Sandstrom, for the Crown;

No one appearing for the defendant.

This case was heard before Niedermayer, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following judgment on October 9, 1990: