R. v. Deschamps (M.B.),

JurisdictionManitoba
JudgeHuband, Monnin and Steel, JJ.A.
Neutral Citation2003 MBCA 116
Date24 June 2003
CourtCourt of Appeal (Manitoba)

R. v. Deschamps (M.B.) (2003), 177 Man.R.(2d) 301 (CA);

    304 W.A.C. 301

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2003] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. OC.005

In The Matter Of: An application by D.A.W. Phillips, the counsel of record for Michel Burton Deschamps, to withdraw as counsel of record, such motion having been denied by Madam Justice Keyser

Her Majesty The Queen v. Michel Burton Deschamps (accused)

(AR 03-30-05579; 2003 MBCA 116)

Indexed As: R. v. Deschamps (M.B.)

Manitoba Court of Appeal

Huband, Monnin and Steel, JJ.A.

September 19, 2003.

Summary:

A lawyer, Phillips, had been acting for an accused for over two years on a variety of criminal charges. The accused's legal fees were paid by Legal Aid. Upon conviction, the Crown applied to have the accused declared a dangerous offender. The lawyer agreed to represent the accused on the dangerous offender application, again on the basis that Legal Aid would pay the legal fees. The dangerous offender hearing began but was adjourned for several months so the accused could pursue treatment options. The lawyer had a dispute with Legal Aid over fees and applied to withdraw as counsel of record, arguing that Legal Aid had breached a contract with him regarding fees.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the application. The court held that the contract between the lawyer and Legal Aid had not been breached, and even if it was, the court would not grant leave to withdraw because of prejudice to the accused and the administration of justice as a whole. The lawyer appealed.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The court held that it was unnecessary to decide if Legal Aid had breached its contract with the lawyer. Even if the contract was breached, non-payment of fees was not sufficient reason for a court to allow counsel of record to withdraw from a criminal matter where serious prejudice would result to the client. The granting of a motion to withdraw, being a matter of discretion, should be accorded considerable deference and should be disturbed only if shown to be clearly wrong. The court was not convinced that the order in this case was clearly wrong. The court stated further, that notwithstanding its comments on the merits, the court would have dismissed the appeal, in any event, for lack of jurisdiction. The court held that because of a gap in legislation, the court did not have jurisdiction to entertain third party appeals in these circumstances.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 1583

Relationship with client - Termination of relationship - Withdrawal by lawyer - General - The Manitoba Court of Appeal reviewed the law regarding the withdrawal of a lawyer as counsel of record in a criminal matter, and in particular where a lawyer wishes to withdraw for non-payment of legal fees - See paragraphs 19 to 42.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 1583

Relationship with client - Termination of relationship - Withdrawal by lawyer - General - A lawyer was representing an accused on a dangerous offender application, with the legal fees to be paid by Legal Aid - The lawyer applied to withdraw as counsel of record, with the lawyer alleging a breach of contract by Legal Aid respecting legal fees - A motions judge dismissed the withdrawal application, holding that the contract had not been breached, and even if it was, withdrawal would not be permitted because of potential prejudice to the accused - The lawyer appealed - The Manitoba Court of Appeal agreed with the motions judge's decision, holding that the ruling should be accorded considerable deference and was not clearly wrong - The court held that notwithstanding its comments on the merits, the appeal had to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction (i.e., as a result of a gap in legislation the court did not have jurisdiction to entertain third party appeals in these circumstances).

Criminal Law - Topic 4824

Appeals - Indictable offences - Right of appeal - Of ruling against a third party - [See second Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 1583 ].

Cases Noticed:

Leask v. Cronin, P.C.J., [1985] 3 W.W.R. 152; 66 B.C.L.R. 187 (S.C.), disagreed with [para. 21].

R. v. Creasser (D.D.) (1996), 187 A.R. 279; 127 W.A.C. 279; 110 C.C.C.(3d) 323 (C.A.), leave to appeal dismissed, [1996] S.C.C.A. No. 453, refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. D.D.C. - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.).

R. v. Ferguson - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.).

R. v. Gillespie (G.D.) (2000), 146 Man.R.(2d) 279 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Olah, Brooks, Groomes and Fong (1979), 4 Sask.R. 62; 7 C.R.(3d) 273 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

R. v. Chan (M.K.) et al. (2002), 317 A.R. 240; 284 W.A.C. 240; 170 C.C.C.(3d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Kong (V.), [2003] A.R. Uned. 96 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Mills, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 863; 67 N.R. 241; 16 O.A.C. 81; 52 C.R.(3d) 1; 29 D.L.R.(4th) 161; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 28].

Kourtessis et al. v. Minister of National Revenue et al., [1993] 2 S.C.R. 53; 153 N.R. 1; 27 B.C.A.C. 81; 45 W.A.C. 81; 81 C.C.C.(3d) 286, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. McCullough (G.B.) (2000), 203 Sask.R. 61; 240 W.A.C. 61; 151 C.C.C.(3d) 281 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Bird and Peebles (1984), 27 Man.R.(2d) 241 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Adamson (1991), 49 O.A.C. 26; 65 C.C.C.(3d) 159 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33].

Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Dagenais et al., [1994] 3 S.C.R. 835; 175 N.R. 1; 76 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. DeJong (J.M.) (1996), 74 B.C.A.C. 146; 121 W.A.C. 146 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. Aggek (D.I.) (1999), 209 N.B.R.(2d) 16; 535 A.P.R. 16 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

R. v. Druken (J.K.) (1997), 157 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 93; 486 A.P.R. 93 (Nfld. C.A.), revd. [1998] 1 S.C.R. 978; 228 N.R. 1; 166 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 107; 511 A.P.R. 107, refd to. [para. 37].

R. v. Primeau (D.J.), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 60; 180 N.R. 101; 131 Sask.R. 198; 95 W.A.C. 198, refd to. [para. 39].

R.C. v. Québec (Procureur général), [2002] 2 S.C.R. 762; 289 N.R. 206, refd to. [para. 41].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 674 [para. 27].

Counsel:

D.A.W. Phillips, on his own behalf;

C.A. Devine, for the Crown.

This matter was heard on June 24, 2003, before Huband, Monnin and Steel, JJ.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal. Steel, J.A., delivered the following judgment for the court on September 19, 2003.

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 practice notes
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Ethics and Criminal Law. Second Edition
    • June 19, 2015
    ...2 CCC (2d) 339, [1970] OJ No 1788 (CA) ...............................................................................291 R v Deschamps, 2003 MBCA 116 ........................................543, 561, 563, 565, 653 R v Desmond, 2010 ONSC 2945 ......................................................
  • Cunningham v. Lilles et al., (2010) 283 B.C.A.C. 280 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • November 17, 2009
    ...[para. 13]. R. v. Ferguson (J.R.) - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.). R. v. D.D.C. - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.). R. v. Deschamps (M.B.) (2003), 177 Man.R.(2d) 301; 304 W.A.C. 301; 2003 MBCA 116, consd. [para. Bernier v. 9006-1474 Quebec inc., [2001] J.Q. no. 2631 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. Mireau......
  • Cunningham v. Lilles et al., (2010) 399 N.R. 326 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • November 17, 2009
    ...[para. 13]. R. v. Ferguson (J.R.) - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.). R. v. D.D.C. - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.). R. v. Deschamps (M.B.) (2003), 177 Man.R.(2d) 301; 304 W.A.C. 301; 2003 MBCA 116, consd. [para. Bernier v. 9006-1474 Quebec inc., [2001] J.Q. no. 2631 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. Mireau......
  • Termination of the Client-Lawyer Relationship
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Ethics and Criminal Law. Second Edition
    • June 19, 2015
    ...para 9 [ Cunningham ]; R v Amos , 2012 ONCA 334 at para 19 [ Amos ]; R v Vachon , 2011 QCCA 2103 at para 39 [ Vachon ]; R v Deschamps , 2003 MBCA 116 at para 19 [ Deschamps ]; R v DDC (1996), 110 CCC (3d) 323 at 325 [para 8] (Alta CA), leave to appeal to SCC refused, [1996] SCCA No 453 [ DD......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
21 cases
  • Cunningham v. Lilles et al., (2010) 283 B.C.A.C. 280 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • November 17, 2009
    ...[para. 13]. R. v. Ferguson (J.R.) - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.). R. v. D.D.C. - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.). R. v. Deschamps (M.B.) (2003), 177 Man.R.(2d) 301; 304 W.A.C. 301; 2003 MBCA 116, consd. [para. Bernier v. 9006-1474 Quebec inc., [2001] J.Q. no. 2631 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. Mireau......
  • Cunningham v. Lilles et al., (2010) 399 N.R. 326 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • November 17, 2009
    ...[para. 13]. R. v. Ferguson (J.R.) - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.). R. v. D.D.C. - see R. v. Creasser (D.D.). R. v. Deschamps (M.B.) (2003), 177 Man.R.(2d) 301; 304 W.A.C. 301; 2003 MBCA 116, consd. [para. Bernier v. 9006-1474 Quebec inc., [2001] J.Q. no. 2631 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 16]. Mireau......
  • R. v. Moman (R.), 2008 MBQB 311
    • Canada
    • Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
    • November 21, 2008
    ...17]. R. v. Teerhuis-Moar (S.) (2008), 228 Man.R.(2d) 248; 427 W.A.C. 248; 2008 MBCA 85, refd to. [para. 21]. R. v. Deschamps (M.B.) (2003), 177 Man.R.(2d) 301; 304 W.A.C. 301; 2003 MBCA 116, refd to. [para. R. v. Rodrigue (J.J.) (1994), 53 B.C.A.C. 275; 87 W.A.C. 275; 95 C.C.C.(3d) 129 (Y.T......
  • R. v. Pardy (T.), 2014 NLCA 37
    • Canada
    • Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal (Newfoundland)
    • June 5, 2014
    ...Revenue et al., [1993] 2 S.C.R. 53; 153 N.R. 1; 27 B.C.A.C. 81; 45 W.A.C. 81, dist. [paras. 21, 143]. R. v. Deschamps (M.B.) (2003), 177 Man.R.(2d) 301; 304 W.A.C. 301; 179 C.C.C.(3d) 174; 2003 MBCA 116, dist. [paras. 21, 143]. R. v. G.D.B., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 520; 253 N.R. 201; 261 A.R. 1; 22......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Ethics and Criminal Law. Second Edition
    • June 19, 2015
    ...2 CCC (2d) 339, [1970] OJ No 1788 (CA) ...............................................................................291 R v Deschamps, 2003 MBCA 116 ........................................543, 561, 563, 565, 653 R v Desmond, 2010 ONSC 2945 ......................................................
  • Termination of the Client-Lawyer Relationship
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Ethics and Criminal Law. Second Edition
    • June 19, 2015
    ...para 9 [ Cunningham ]; R v Amos , 2012 ONCA 334 at para 19 [ Amos ]; R v Vachon , 2011 QCCA 2103 at para 39 [ Vachon ]; R v Deschamps , 2003 MBCA 116 at para 19 [ Deschamps ]; R v DDC (1996), 110 CCC (3d) 323 at 325 [para 8] (Alta CA), leave to appeal to SCC refused, [1996] SCCA No 453 [ DD......

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