R. v. Dacey, (1980) 31 N.B.R.(2d) 552 (PC)

JudgeCounty of York Harper, P.C.J.
CourtProvincial Court of New Brunswick (Canada)
Case DateJuly 16, 1980
JurisdictionNew Brunswick
Citations(1980), 31 N.B.R.(2d) 552 (PC)

R. v. Dacey (1980), 31 N.B.R.(2d) 552 (PC);

    31 R.N.-B.(2e) 552; 75 A.P.R. 552

MLB headnote and full text

Sommaire et texte intégral

R. v. Dacey

Indexed As: R. v. Dacey

Répertorié: R. v. Dacey

New Brunswick Provincial Court

County of York Harper, P.C.J.

July 16, 1980.

Summary:

Résumé:

This headnote contains no summary.

Master and Servant - Topic 1813

Remuneration - Wages - Payment of - What constitutes - An employer was charged with failing to pay wages to two employees - The employer issued cheques to both employees at a time when sufficient funds existed in the employer's bank account to cover the cheques - Both employees delayed cashing the cheques until a number of business days expired and the funds to cover the cheques were no longer in the employer's account - The New Brunswick Provincial Court dismissed the charges and held that the employer did pay the employees, because at the time the cheques issued and for a reasonable time after, sufficient funds existed in the employer's account had the cheques been presented for payment - See paragraph 14.

Master and Servant - Topic 1848

Remuneration - Statutory regulation - Payment of wages - The New Brunswick Provincial Court stated that offences of nonpayment of wages under the Minimum Employment Standards Act are offences of strict liability - See paragraph 13.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. City of Sault Ste. Marie (1978), 21 N.R. 295; 3 C.R. (3rd) 30, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Chapin (1979), 26 N.R. 289; 7 C.R.(3d) 225, refd to. [para. 13].

Statutes Noticed:

Minimum Employment Standards Act, R.S.N.B. 1973, c. M-12, sect. 14(1) [para. 7].

Counsel:

John MacPhee, for the defendant;

Manu Patel, for the Crown.

This case was heard by HARPER, P.C.J., of the New Brunswick Provincial Court, County of York.

On July 16, 1980, HARPER, P.C.J., delivered the following judgment:

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT