R. v. Davis (L.J.) et al., (2000) 195 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 183 (PEITD)

• Judge: DesRoches, J.
• Case Date: September 12, 2000
• Jurisdiction: Prince Edward Island
• Citations: (2000), 195 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 183 (PEITD);2000 PESCTD 77

R. v. Davis (L.J.) (2000), 195 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 183 (PEITD);

    586 A.P.R. 183

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2000] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. TBEd. SE.029

Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. Laurie J. Davis, Ronald G. Davis, 3021310 Nova Scotia Limited, Lauron Enterprises Incorporated and Davis Personal And Professional Development Seminars Limited (respondents)

(GSC-17772; 2000 PESCTD 77)

Indexed As: R. v. Davis (L.J.) et al.

Prince Edward Island Supreme Court

Trial Division

DesRoches, J.

September 26, 2000.

Summary:

The accused were charged with trading in securities without being registered as a broker or salesman of a registered broker, contrary to ss. 2(1) and 28(1) of the Secur­ities Act. The trial judge found the charge void ab initio and quashed it. The Crown appealed.

The Prince Edward Island Supreme Court, Trial Division, allowed the appeal.

Criminal Law - Topic 7283

Summary conviction proceedings - Infor­mations - Defects - Curing of - The accused were charged with trading in securities without being registered as a broker or salesman of a registered broker, contrary to ss. 2(1) and 28(1) of the Secur­ities Act - The trial judge found that the charge was so lacking in specificity that it was void ab initio - Because the applica­tion was brought before plea, the trial judge found that the defect could not be cured - The charge was quashed - The Crown appealed - The Prince Edward Island Supreme Court, Trial Division, allowed the appeal - The charge should have been amended - A charge should only be quashed if it is so defective as to fail to charge any offence at all.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Moore, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 1097; 85 N.R. 195; 41 C.C.C.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Major, [1977] 1 S.C.R. 826; 8 N.R. 210; 27 C.C.C.(2d) 239n, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Cote, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 8; 13 N.R. 271; 40 C.R.N.S. 308; [1977] 2 W.W.R. 174; 73 D.L.R.(3d) 752; 33 C.C.C.(2d) 353, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Milberg et al. (1987), 20 O.A.C. 75; 35 C.C.C.(3d) 45 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. WIS Developments Corp. et al., [1984] 1 S.C.R. 485; 53 N.R. 134; 53 A.R. 58; 40 C.R.(3d) 97, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Burke (1987), 62 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 321; 190 A.P.R. 321 (P.E.I.T.D.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. A.G.W., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 3; 146 N.R. 141; 103 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 48; 326 A.P.R. 48; 78 C.C.C.(3d) 302, refd to. [para. 15].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 581 [para. 7]; sect. 583 [para. 8].

Securities Act, R.S.P.E.I. 1988, c. S-3, sect. 2(1)(a) [para. 11].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Quigley, T., Procedure in Canadian Crimi­nal Law, p. 358 [para. 10].

Salhany, Canadian Criminal Procedure, pp. 7-9, 7-10 [para. 13].

Counsel:

John A. McMillan, for the appellant;

Laurie Davis and Ronald Davis on their own behalf.

This appeal was heard at Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, on September 12, 2000, before DesRoches, J., of the Prince Edward Island Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on Septem­ber 26, 2000.