R. v. Marsland (J.C.), 2011 SKQB 207

• Judge: Wilson, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
• Case Date: May 26, 2011
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: 2011 SKQB 207;(2011), 374 Sask.R. 255 (QB)

R. v. Marsland (J.C.) (2011), 374 Sask.R. 255 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2011] Sask.R. TBEd. JN.011

Her Majesty the Queen as Represented by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Attorney General of Saskatchewan (appellants) v. Jason Cody Marsland (respondent)

(2008 Q.B.A. No. 6; 2011 SKQB 207)

Indexed As: R. v. Marsland (J.C.)

Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial Centre of Battleford

Wilson, J.

May 26, 2011.

Summary:

The accused was charged with transporting white-tailed deer interprovincially without a valid federal permit (Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (Can.) (WAPPRIITA), s. 6(3)), with possession of white-tailed deer that had been transported interprovincially contrary to the WAPPRIITA (s. 8(a)), and with unlawfully importing white-tailed deer/wildlife without an import permit (Wildlife Act (Sask.), s. 31(1)(b)).

The Saskatchewan Provincial Court, in a decision reported 326 Sask.R. 147, acquitted the accused on all charges. The Crown (Canada) appealed and the Attorney General of Saskatchewan filed a notice of participation.

The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench allowed the appeals respecting all three charges and entered convictions on those charges. The court imposed a fine of $5,000 for the convictions under ss. 6(3) and 8(a) of the WAPPRIITA and a fine of $1.00 for the conviction under s. 31 of the Wildlife Act.

Fish and Game - Topic 2735.2

Offences - Sentence - Fines and penalties - Interprovincial or international transportation of wildlife - The accused, a deer farmer, was transporting five white-tailed deer from his deer farming ranch in Alberta to a first nations hunt farm operation in Saskatchewan - En route, the accused was stopped in Saskatchewan - He was charged with transporting white-tailed deer interprovincially without a valid permit (Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (Can.) (WAPPRIITA, s. 6(3)), possession of white-tailed deer that had been transported interprovincially (WAPPRIITA, s. 8(a)) and with unlawfully importing white-tailed deer without an import permit (Wildlife Act (Sask.), s. 31(1)(b)) - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench convicted the accused - These were strict liability offences - The accused did not have the import license he was required to have under the Wildlife Act - Although it was not possible for him to obtain such a license because the first nations could not obtain a provincial license for its hunt farm, that did not excuse the accused from the Wildlife Act requirements - That violation of the Wildlife Act, led to the violation under WAPPRIITA - The accused was guilty under WAPPRIITA if he had no provincial import license as required by the Wildlife Act - Further, the accused did not establish due diligence, nor was the defence of officially induced error available - See paragraphs 1 to 58.

Fish and Game - Topic 2735.2

Offences - Sentence - Fines and penalties - Interprovincial or international transportation of wildlife - The accused, a deer farmer, was transporting five white-tailed deer from his deer farming ranch in Alberta to a first nations hunt farm operation in Saskatchewan - En route, the accused was stopped in Saskatchewan - He was charged with transporting white-tailed deer interprovincially without a valid permit (Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (Can.) (WAPPRIITA, s. 6(3)), possession of white-tailed deer that had been transported interprovincially (WAPPRIITA, s. 8(a)) and with unlawfully importing white-tailed deer without an import permit (Wildlife Act (Sask.), s. 31(1)(b)) - The Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench convicted the accused - The court noted that this was a first offence - Although there were two charges under WAPPRIITA, the court opined that the possession charge was subsumed into the importing charge and it need only sentence for one offence - The court imposed the minimum fine of $5,000 for the convictions under ss. 6(3) and 8(a) of the WAPPRIITA and a fine of $1.00 for the conviction under s. 31 of the Wildlife Act - See paragraphs 59 to 64.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Schmalz, 2007 SKQB 234, refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. Gorman (R.), [2000] Sask.R. Uned. 12; 2000 SKQB 12, refd to. [para. 5].

R. v. R.W.H. (2010), 350 Sask.R. 193; 487 W.A.C. 193; 2010 SKCA 49, refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Graveline (R.), [2006] 1 S.C.R. 609; 347 N.R. 268; 2006 SCC 16, refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Hayworth (K.W.) et al. (2003), 231 Sask.R. 204; 2003 SKPC 52, refd to. [para. 42].

Berg et al. v. Saskatchewan (Minister of Environment and Resource Management) (2003), 243 Sask.R. 29; 2003 SKQB 456, refd to. [para. 43].

R. v. Pearsall, [1978] 5 W.W.R. 298; 80 D.L.R.(3d) 285 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 44].

R. v. Sault Ste. Marie (City), [1978] 2 S.C.R. 1299; 21 N.R. 295; 85 D.L.R.(3d) 161, refd to. [para. 50].

Lévis (City) v. Tétreault, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 420; 346 N.R. 331; 2006 SCC 12, refd to. [para. 51].

R. v. Shiner (W.) (2007), 264 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 186; 801 A.P.R. 186; 2007 NLCA 18, refd to. [para. 56].

Statutes Noticed:

Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act, S.C. 1992, c. 52, sect. 6(3), sect. 8(a), sect. 10(1) [para. 19].

Wildlife Act, S.S. 1998, c. W-13.12, sect. 31(1)(b) [para. 1].

Counsel:

Horst H. Dahlem, Q.C., for the Crown (Canada);

Inez J. Cardinal, Q.C., for the Attorney General (Saskatchewan);

J. Rangi G. Jeerakathil, for the accused.

This matter was heard before Wilson, J, of the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Battleford, who delivered the following judgment on May 26, 2011.