R. v. Fotti, (1980) 31 N.R. 100 (SCC)
Judge | Martland, Ritchie, Pigeon, Beetz and Chouinard, JJ. |
Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
Case Date | February 07, 1980 |
Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
Citations | (1980), 31 N.R. 100 (SCC);[1980] 3 WWR 617;50 CCC (2d) 479;4 MVR 172;1980 CanLII 171 (SCC);31 NR 100;2 Man R (2d) 180;[1980] 1 SCR 589 |
R. v. Fotti (1980), 31 N.R. 100 (SCC)
MLB headnote and full text
R. v. Fotti
Indexed As: R. v. Fotti
Supreme Court of Canada
Martland, Ritchie, Pigeon, Beetz and Chouinard, JJ.
February 7, 1980.
Summary:
This case arose out of a charge of dangerous driving contrary to s. 233(4) of the Criminal Code. The accused drove through a red light and struck a motorcycle and killed two people. The accused did not see the motorcycle which should have been plainly visible to him. The trial judge acquitted the accused and characterized his conduct in the circumstances as a "momentary lapse". The Crown appealed to the Manitoba Court of Appeal.
The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and convicted the accused. The Manitoba Court of Appeal held that the conduct of the accused could not be characterized as a momentary lapse nor as inadvertent negligence (see paragraph 34). The judgment of the Manitoba Court of Appeal is set out below - see paragraphs 5 to 50. The accused appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment of the Manitoba Court of Appeal - See paragraphs 1 to 4.
Criminal Law - Topic 1391
Motor vehicles - Dangerous driving, what constitutes - Criminal Code, s. 233(4) - The accused drove through a red light and struck a motorcycle and killed 2 people - The accused did not see the motorcycle which should have been plainly visible to him - The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the conviction of the accused on a charge of dangerous driving - The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed a finding of the Manitoba Court of Appeal that such conduct cannot be characterized as a momentary lapse nor as inadvertent negligence (see paragraph 34).
Criminal Law - Topic 4860
Appeals - Indictable offences - Grounds of appeal - Question of law - The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed the Manitoba Court of Appeal which stated that a question of law arises when a judge misdirects himself as to the legal effect of facts found by the trial judge (On a charge of dangerous driving the trial judge found that an accused was guilty of only a "momentary lapse" when he drove through a red light and struck a plainly visible motorcycle) - See paragraphs 31 to 34.
Cases Noticed:
Belyea v. R.; Weinraub v. R. (1932), 57 C.C.C. 318; [1932] 2 D.L.R. 88; [1932] S.C.R. 279, refd to. [paras. 8 and 29].
R. v. Odeon Morton Theatres Ltd. et al. (1974), 16 C.C.C.(2d) 185; 45 D.L.R.(3d) 224; [1974] 3 W.W.R. 304, refd to. [para. 12].
R. v. Prince, [1970] 2 C.C.C. 213; 11 C.R.N.S. 193; 73 W.W.R. 328, refd to. [paras. 23 and 38].
Peda v. R., [1969] 4 C.C.C. 245; 6 D.L.R.(3d) 177; [1969] S.C.R. 905; 7 C.R.N.S. 243, refd to. [paras. 23 and 38].
R. v. Lowe (1975), 21 C.C.C.(2d) 193; 6 O.R.(2d) 585, refd to. [paras. 25 and 43].
Lampard v. R., [1969] 3 C.C.C. 249; 4 D.L.R.(3d) 98; [1969] S.C.R. 373, dist. [para. 26].
Wild v. R., [1970] 4 C.C.C. 40; 11 D.L.R.(3d) 58; [1971] S.C.R. 101, refd to. [para. 27].
Sunbeam Corp. (Canada) Ltd. v. R., [1969] 2 C.C.C. 189; 1 D.L.R.(3d) 161; [1969] S.C.R. 221, refd to. [para. 29].
R. v. Lemire, [1965] 4 C.C.C. 11; 51 D.L.R.(2d) 312; [1965] S.C.R. 174, refd to. [para. 32].
Poitras v. The Queen (1973), 12 C.C.C.(2d) 337; 37 D.L.R.(3d) 411; [1973] 6 W.W.R. 183, refd to. [para. 32].
Brutus v. Cozens, [1973] A.C. 854; [1972] 2 All E.R. 1297 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Feeley, [1973] Q.B. 530; [1973] 1 All E.R. 341 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 44].
R. v. Sorrell and Bondett (1978), 41 C.C.C.(2d) 9, refd to. [para. 49].
R. v. Davis and Sokoloski (1974), 14 C.C.C.(2d) 517 (affd. 33 C.C.C.(2d) 496; 74 D.L.R.(3d) 126; [1977] 2 S.C.R. 523), refd to. [para. 31].
Statutes Noticed:
Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 233(4) [para. 11].
Counsel:
R.H.G. Flett, for the appellant;
J.G.B. Dangerfield, for the respondent Crown.
This appeal was heard by MARTLAND, RITCHIE, PIGEON, BEETZ and CHOUINARD, JJ. of the Supreme Court of Canada at Ottawa, Ontario on October 23, 1979.
The judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada was delivered by BEETZ, J. on February 7, 1980.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. v. Stewart (M.R.), (1992) 135 A.R. 173 (CA)
...S.C.R. 905, refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. Fotti, [1979] 1 W.W.R. 652; 2 Man.R.(2d) 182; 1 M.V.R. 279; 45 C.C.C.(2d) 353 (C.A.), affd. [1980] 1 S.C.R. 589; 31 N.R. 100; 2 Man.R.(2d) 180; [1980] 3 W.W.R. 617; 50 C.C.C.(2d) 479, refd to. [para. 10]. R. v. Zappone (1991), 115 A.R. 77; 29 M.V.R.(2d)......
-
R. v. Sundman,
...Queen, [1970] S.C.R. 804, Poitras v. The Queen, [1974] S.C.R. 649, Johnson v. The Queen, [1975] 2 S.C.R. 160, and Fotti v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 589. [171] To reiterate, the judge found a close temporal nexus between the confinement and the murder. The gap in time was found to be “brie......
-
R. v. Bilodeau (M.J.), (2005) 219 B.C.A.C. 261 (CA)
...31]. R. v. Kewaquado (S.D.J.), [2001] O.J. No. 6063 (Sup. Ct.), affd. [2003] O.A.C. Uned. 202 (C.A.), dist. [para. 31]. R. v. Fotti, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 589; 31 N.R. 100; 2 Man.R.(2d) 180, affing. (1978), 2 Man.R.(2d) 182; 45 C.C.C.(2d) 353 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33]. R. v. Morin (K.M.), [1992......
-
R. v. D.S.H. and J.D.N., (1993) 28 B.C.A.C. 129 (CA)
...Johnson v. The Queen (1973), 13 C.C.C.(2d) 402; 40 D.L.R.(3d) 215; [1975] 2 S.C.R. 160, and R. v. Fotti (1980), 50 C.C.C.(2d) 479n; [1980] 1 S.C.R. 589; 4 M.V.R. 172. "(2) Misdirection as to evidence " R. v. B.(G.) , supra, proceeded on the basis (conceded by the Crown at p. 193) that failu......
-
R. v. Stewart (M.R.), (1992) 135 A.R. 173 (CA)
...S.C.R. 905, refd to. [para. 9]. R. v. Fotti, [1979] 1 W.W.R. 652; 2 Man.R.(2d) 182; 1 M.V.R. 279; 45 C.C.C.(2d) 353 (C.A.), affd. [1980] 1 S.C.R. 589; 31 N.R. 100; 2 Man.R.(2d) 180; [1980] 3 W.W.R. 617; 50 C.C.C.(2d) 479, refd to. [para. 10]. R. v. Zappone (1991), 115 A.R. 77; 29 M.V.R.(2d)......
-
R. v. Sundman,
...Queen, [1970] S.C.R. 804, Poitras v. The Queen, [1974] S.C.R. 649, Johnson v. The Queen, [1975] 2 S.C.R. 160, and Fotti v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 589. [171] To reiterate, the judge found a close temporal nexus between the confinement and the murder. The gap in time was found to be “brie......
-
R. v. Bilodeau (M.J.), (2005) 219 B.C.A.C. 261 (CA)
...31]. R. v. Kewaquado (S.D.J.), [2001] O.J. No. 6063 (Sup. Ct.), affd. [2003] O.A.C. Uned. 202 (C.A.), dist. [para. 31]. R. v. Fotti, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 589; 31 N.R. 100; 2 Man.R.(2d) 180, affing. (1978), 2 Man.R.(2d) 182; 45 C.C.C.(2d) 353 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 33]. R. v. Morin (K.M.), [1992......
-
R v Lemay, 2020 ABCA 365
...Ciglen v The Queen, [1970] SCR 804, Poitras v The Queen, [1974] SCR 649, Johnson v The Queen, [1975] 2 SCR 160, and Fotti v The Queen, [1980] 1 SCR 589. [21] Thus, “[w]hether a person is in a position of trust on the facts found is a conclusion of law reviewable on the standard of correctne......