R. v. Johnston, (1977) 3 A.R. 181 (NWTCA)

• Judge: Clement, Lieberman and Morrow, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Northwest Territories)
• Case Date: March 18, 1977
• Jurisdiction: Northwest Territories
• Citations: (1977), 3 A.R. 181 (NWTCA)

R. v. Johnston (1977), 3 A.R. 181 (NWTCA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Johnston

Indexed As: R. v. Johnston

Northwest Territories Court of Appeal

Clement, Lieberman and Morrow, JJ.A.

March 18, 1977.

Summary:

This case arose out of a charge and conviction of impaired driving in July, 1976. Pursuant to an amendment to the Criminal Code in March 1976, the trial judge imposed an increased penalty because of a previous conviction of the accused in 1975. The accused alleged that the March 1976 amendment as it applied to him operated retrospectively because his first conviction in 1975 was before the March 1976 amendment to the Criminal Code.

On appeal to the Northwest Territories Court of Appeal the appeal was dismissed and the imposition of an increased penalty was affirmed. The Northwest Territories Court of Appeal held that the operation of the 1976 amendment to the Criminal Code as it applied to the accused did not operate retrospectively but operated prospectively even though the imposition of the penalty took into account past offences.

Criminal Law - Topic 5606

Punishments - Increased punishment for prior convictions - Requirement of notice to the accused of increased punishment pursuant to s. 740 of the Criminal Code - Charge of impaired driving - The Northwest Territories Court of Appeal examined the form and content of a notice served on the accused pursuant to s. 740 of the Criminal Code - The Northwest Territories Court of Appeal held that the notice was valid because the accused was not misled by the form and content of the notice - See paragraphs 15 and 16.

Statutes - Topic 501

Interpretation of statutes - General principles - Duty to promote the purpose or object of a statute - The Northwest Territories Court of Appeal stated that it is the paramount duty of the judicial interpreter to determine the plain and rational meaning of a statute and to promote the object of the statute - See paragraph 9.

Statutes - Topic 6703

Retrospective enactments - What constitutes retrospective enactments - The accused pled guilty to a charge of impaired driving in 1975 and was fined - In March 1976 the Criminal Code was amended to provide an increased penalty for a second offence of impaired driving - In July 1976 the accused pled guilty to a charge of impaired driving and an increased penalty was imposed because the July 1976 offence constituted a second offence - The accused alleged that if the March 1976 amendment applied to him it would operate retrospectively - The Northwest Territories Court of Appeal held that the operation of the amendment as applied to the accused did not operate retrospectively but operated prospectively even though the imposition of the penalty took into account past offences.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Inhabitants of St. Mary, Whitechapel, 116 E.R. 811, folld. [para. 6].

R. v. Christchurch, 116 E.R. 823, folld. [para. 6].

R. v. Austin, [1913] 1 K.B. 551, folld. [para. 7].

Master Ladies' Tailors' Organization et al. v. Minister of Labour, [1950] 2 All E.R. 527, folld. [para. 8].

Re A Solicitor's Clerk, [1957] 1 W.L.R. 1219, folld. [para. 8].

R. v. Lelievre (1956), 115 C.C.C. 404, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Campbell, 8 C.R. 306 (S.C. of P.E.I.), refd to. [para. 9].

Re Green (1936), 10 M.P.R. 338, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Robinson, [1968] S.C.R. 341, folld. [para. 9].

Buckman v. Button, [1943] 2 All E.R. 82, folld. [para. 10].

R. v. Oliver, [1943] 2 All E.R. 800, folld. [para. 10].

Ex parte Todd; Re Ashcroft (1887), 19 Q.B.D. 186, folld. [para. 11].

Trans-Canada Insurance Company v. Winter, [1935] S.C.R. 184, folld. [para. 11].

R. v. Paton, [1968] S.C.R. 341, folld. [para. 13].

R. v. Marcil (1977), 31 C.C.C.(2d) 172, folld. [para. 16].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 236, sect. 236.1 [para. 3]; sect. 740 [para. 15].

Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. I-23, sect. 37(2) [para. 13].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Craies on Statute Law (7th Ed.), p. 387 [para. 5].

Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes (9th Ed.), p. 267 [para. 9].

Counsel:

P. Ayotte, for the appellant;

Orval J.T. Troy, Q.C., for the Crown.

The judgment of the Northwest Territories Court of Appeal was delivered at Edmonton, Alberta on March 18, 1977. The judgment of the Northwest Territories Court of Appeal was delivered by CLEMENT, J.A.