R. v. Durrani (A.), (2008) 247 O.A.C. 189 (CA)

• Judge: MacPherson, J.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ontario)
• Case Date: October 16, 2008
• Jurisdiction: Ontario
• Citations: (2008), 247 O.A.C. 189 (CA);2008 ONCA 856

R. v. Durrani (A.) (2008), 247 O.A.C. 189 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] O.A.C. TBEd. JA.002

Her Majesty the Queen (respondent) v. Amin Durrani (applicant)

(M36827; 2008 ONCA 856)

Indexed As: R. v. Durrani (A.)

Ontario Court of Appeal

MacPherson, J.A.

December 16, 2008.

Summary:

The applicant sought a review of an Ontario Superior Court order denying him bail.

The Ontario Court of Appeal, per MacPherson, J.A., in Chambers, dismissed the application.

Criminal Law - Topic 3311

Compelling appearance, detention and release - Interim release or detention of accused pending trial or appeal - Power of Court of Appeal - [See Criminal Law - Topic 3320 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 3317

Compelling appearance, detention and release - Interim release or detention of accused pending trial or appeal - Jurisdiction of court - [See Criminal Law - Topic 3320 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 3320

Compelling appearance, detention and release - Interim release or detention of accused pending trial or appeal - Review - The accused was charged with two counts of knowingly participating in or contributing to a terrorist group - A preliminary inquiry commenced and continued until a direct indictment was filed with the Ontario Superior Court, which thrice denied bail to the accused - The accused applied to a judge of the Ontario Court of Appeal for a review of the third denial - An issue arose as to which court had jurisdiction to hear the review application - The Ontario Court of Appeal, per MacPherson, J.A., in Chambers, held firstly that the accused was not "being tried" for the purposes of the bail provisions of the Criminal Code since he had not been put in charge of the jury - As a result, s. 523(2) could not operate to confer exclusive review jurisdiction to the Superior Court here - Consequently, the Superior Court and the Court of Appeal had concurrent review jurisdiction under s. 520(1) - Nevertheless, the Ontario Court of Appeal, absent special circumstances, declined to exercise its review jurisdiction and dismissed the accused's application - See paragraphs 8 to 34.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Basarabas; R. v. Spek, [1982] 2 S.C.R. 730; 46 N.R. 69, consd. [para. 9].

R. v. Hertrich, Stewart and Skinner (1982), 67 C.C.C.(2d) 510 (Ont. C.A.), consd. [para. 10].

R. v. Côté and Vézina, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 2; 64 N.R. 93, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Barrow, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 694; 81 N.R. 321; 87 N.S.R.(2d) 271; 222 A.P.R. 271, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. McCreery (T.S.), [1996] B.C.T.C. Uned. D42; 110 C.C.C.(3d) 561 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Savoie (T.) et al. (2001), 239 N.B.R.(2d) 291; 619 A.P.R. 291 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Petrie, [1985] 2 W.W.R. 128; 30 Man.R.(2d) 145 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. S., [1985] 2 W.W.R. 132; 30 Man.R.(2d) 147 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Mallett (D.W.) No. 2, [1992] 5 W.W.R. 138; 83 Man.R.(2d) 116; 36 W.A.C. 116 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. MacIver (D.N.) (1998), 131 Man.R.(2d) 84; 187 W.A.C. 84 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Zeneli (B.) (2003), 173 Man.R.(2d) 175; 293 W.A.C. 175; 174 C.C.C.(3d) 477 (C.A.), consd. [para. 20].

R. v. Smith (D.W.), [2003] 3 W.W.R. 39; 227 Sask.R. 279; 287 W.A.C. 279 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Chan (M.K.) (2000), 261 A.R. 351; 225 W.A.C. 351; 146 C.C.C.(3d) 494 (Alta. C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Vukelich (M.) v. R. (1993), 32 B.C.A.C. 81; 53 W.A.C. 81 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Massey (D.) et al., [2005] B.C.A.C. Uned. 50; 2005 BCCA 174, refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Carrier (1979), 2 Man.R.(2d) 168; 51 C.C.C.(2d) 307 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Saracino (1989), 47 C.C.C.(3d) 185 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 29].

R. v. Cook (1986), 13 O.A.C. 238; 26 C.C.C.(3d) 188 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Ranger (R.) (2003), 180 O.A.C. 138 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 520(1) [para. 16]; sect. 523(2)(a) [para. 8].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Trotter, Gary T., The Law of Bail in Canada (2nd Ed. 1999), pp. 301, 302 [para. 19]; 347 [para. 13].

Counsel:

Manuel Azevedo, for the applicant;

Clyde Bond and Geoffrey Roy, for the respondent.

This application was heard on October 16, 2008, by MacPherson, J.A., in Chambers, of the Ontario Court of Appeal, who delivered the following decision on December 16, 2008.