R. v. Lindsay (D.K.), [2005] B.C.T.C. 484 (SC)
| Judge | Barrow, J. |
| Court | Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada) |
| Case Date | February 07, 2005 |
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Citations | [2005] B.C.T.C. 484 (SC);2005 BCSC 484 |
R. v. Lindsay (D.K.), [2005] B.C.T.C. 484 (SC)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2005] B.C.T.C. TBEd. MY.034
Regina v. David Kevin Lindsay (David-Kevin: Lindsay)
(59021-1; 2005 BCSC 484)
Indexed As: R. v. Lindsay (D.K.)
British Columbia Supreme Court
Kelowna
Barrow, J.
February 8, 2005.
Summary:
This headnote contains no summary.
Criminal Law - Topic 2810
Jurisdiction - General principles - Jurisdiction over the accused - See paragraphs 1 to 31.
Criminal Law - Topic 2955
Jurisdiction - Loss or suspension of jurisdiction - Over the accused - See paragraphs 1 to 31.
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Naylor (1978), 42 C.C.C.(2d) 12 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].
R. v. Tait, [2001] O.J. No. 2948 (C.J.), refd to. [para. 13].
R. v. Isbell (1928), 51 C.C.C. 362 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].
R. v. Gougeon (1980), 55 C.C.C.(2d) 218 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].
R. v. Walton (1905), 10 C.C.C. 269 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 17].
Poje v. British Columbia (Attorney General), [1953] 1 S.C.R. 516, refd to. [para. 18].
R. v. Poje - see Poje v. British Columbia (Attorney General).
R. v. Hughes (1879), 4 Q.B.D. 614, refd to. [para. 18].
R. v. Sidor (1982), 39 A.R. 541 (Q.B.), refd to. [para. 19].
R. v. Dubois, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 366; 66 N.R. 289; 41 Man.R.(2d) 1; 25 C.C.C.(3d) 221, refd to. [para. 25].
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. 30].
Authors and Works Noticed:
Ewaschuk, Eugene G., Criminal Pleadings and Practice in Canada (2nd Ed.), paras. 1:7120 [para. 20]; 26:300 [para. 23].
Roscoe, Criminal Evidence (15th Ed.), p. 955 [para. 15].
Counsel:
J. Fairbrother, for the Federal Crown;
D.K. Lindsay appeared on his own behalf.
This application was heard on February 7, 2005, before Barrow, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following oral decision on February 8, 2005.
Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R. v. Lindsay (D.K.), (2011) 302 B.C.A.C. 76 (CA)
...within the meaning of that term in the Act - See paragraphs 21 to 27. Cases Noticed: R. v. Lindsay (D.K.), [2005] B.C.T.C. 484 ; 2005 BCSC 484, refd to. [para. 2]. R. v. Lindsay (D.-K.) (2006), 224 B.C.A.C. 172 ; 370 W.A.C. 172 ; 2006 BCCA 150 , refd to. [para. 2]. R. v. Lindsay (D.-K.)......
-
R. v. Lindsay (D.K.), [2010] B.C.T.C. Uned. 831 (SC)
...by Mr. Justice Barrow, who denied the application. Justice Barrow delivered reasons for judgment dated February 8, 2005: R. v. Lindsay , 2005 BCSC 484. The decision of Barrow J. was affirmed by the Court of Appeal: R. v. David Lindsay (David-Kevin: Lindsay) , 2006 BCCA 150 . [12] The trial......
-
R. v. Lindsay (D.-K.), 2006 BCCA 150
...2, 2004 resulted in the Provincial Court's "loss of jurisdiction" over him on these charges. Since the reasons of Barrow, J. (indexed as 2005 BCSC 484), contain a fairly detailed description of the incident, I will describe it only briefly. The Question of Identity [2] At the outset, howeve......
-
R. v. Burgar (K.P.), 2014 BCSC 331
...judge relied on a decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, R. v. Naylor , from which he adopted the follow proposition ( R. v. Lindsay , 2005 BCSC 484 at para. 21): Where there is a valid information and an accused attends, the trial Judge has jurisdiction to proceed with the matter notwith......
-
R. v. Lindsay (D.K.), (2011) 302 B.C.A.C. 76 (CA)
...within the meaning of that term in the Act - See paragraphs 21 to 27. Cases Noticed: R. v. Lindsay (D.K.), [2005] B.C.T.C. 484 ; 2005 BCSC 484, refd to. [para. 2]. R. v. Lindsay (D.-K.) (2006), 224 B.C.A.C. 172 ; 370 W.A.C. 172 ; 2006 BCCA 150 , refd to. [para. 2]. R. v. Lindsay (D.-K.)......
-
R. v. Lindsay (D.K.), [2010] B.C.T.C. Uned. 831 (SC)
...by Mr. Justice Barrow, who denied the application. Justice Barrow delivered reasons for judgment dated February 8, 2005: R. v. Lindsay , 2005 BCSC 484. The decision of Barrow J. was affirmed by the Court of Appeal: R. v. David Lindsay (David-Kevin: Lindsay) , 2006 BCCA 150 . [12] The trial......
-
R. v. Lindsay (D.-K.), 2006 BCCA 150
...2, 2004 resulted in the Provincial Court's "loss of jurisdiction" over him on these charges. Since the reasons of Barrow, J. (indexed as 2005 BCSC 484), contain a fairly detailed description of the incident, I will describe it only briefly. The Question of Identity [2] At the outset, howeve......
-
R. v. Burgar (K.P.), 2014 BCSC 331
...judge relied on a decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal, R. v. Naylor , from which he adopted the follow proposition ( R. v. Lindsay , 2005 BCSC 484 at para. 21): Where there is a valid information and an accused attends, the trial Judge has jurisdiction to proceed with the matter notwith......