R. v. McCarthy's Roofing Ltd., (2016) 372 N.S.R.(2d) 177 (PC)

• Judge: Derrick, P.C.J.
• Court: Provincial Court of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Case Date: March 10, 2016
• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Citations: (2016), 372 N.S.R.(2d) 177 (PC);2016 NSPC 21

R. v. McCarthy's Roofing (2016), 372 N.S.R.(2d) 177 (PC);

    1172 A.P.R. 177

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2016] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. AP.016

Her Majesty the Queen v. McCarthy's Roofing Limited

(Nos. 2854099; 2854100; 2854101; 2854102; 2016 NSPC 21)

Indexed As: R. v. McCarthy's Roofing Ltd.

Nova Scotia Provincial Court

Derrick, P.C.J.

March 31, 2016.

Summary:

McCarthy's Roofing Ltd. was charged with four offences under the Occupational Health and Safety Act following a serious accident at a construction site. McCarthy's applied for an order for particulars pursuant to s. 587(1)(f) of the Criminal Code in relation to counts 1 and 2. McCarthy's argued that particulars were essential for it to make a full answer and defence to those "general duty" charges.

The Nova Scotia Provincial Court ordered the Crown to provide McCarthy's with particulars for count 2 but not count 1.

Civil Rights - Topic 3136

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Right to be informed of alleged offence (Charter, s. 11(a)) - [See Trade Regulation - Topic 7864 ].

Trade Regulation - Topic 7864

Industrial safety - Offences - Information - Sufficiency of general charge respecting failure to comply with regulations (incl. particulars) - McCarthy's Roofing Ltd. was charged with four offences under the Occupational Health and Safety Act following a serious accident at a construction site - McCarthy's applied for an order for particulars pursuant to s. 587(1)(f) of the Criminal Code in relation to counts 1 and 2 - McCarthy's argued that particulars were essential for it to make a full answer and defence to those "general duty" charges - The Nova Scotia Provincial Court concluded that an iteration of the "golden rule" requiring that a count standing alone had to provide sufficient information to an accused had not been applied in an absolute fashion - It was clear that courts took disclosure into account in assessing whether the accused could make a full answer and defence and have a fair trial - Neither s. 581(3) of the Criminal Code nor s. 11(a) of the Charter required the court to ignore, in assessing McCarthy's application for particulars, the disclosure that had been provided by the Crown - The court concluded that McCarthy's fair trial rights were not in jeopardy and it would be able to make a full answer and defence on the basis of the information it had without any particularization of count 1 - However, the court came to a different conclusion in relation to count 2 - The court ordered the Crown to provide McCarthy's with particulars for count 2.

Trials - Topic 1099

Summary convictions - Informations and search warrants - Particulars - [See Trade Regulation - Topic 7864 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Canadian General Electric Co., [1974] O.J. No. 13 (H.C.J.), refd to. [para. 7].

R. v. Saunders - see R. v. Rooke and De Vries.

R. v. Rooke and De Vries (1990), 108 N.R. 234 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Dalton (R.C.) (1999), 192 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 20; 580 A.P.R. 20 (Nfld. T.D.), refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Clarke (B.E.) et al. (2014), 344 N.S.R.(2d) 386; 1089 A.P.R. 386; 2014 NSSC 177, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Longard (R.D.) Services Ltd. (2014), 353 N.S.R.(2d) 329; 1115 A.P.R. 329; 2014 NSPC 100, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Côté, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 8; 13 N.R. 271, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Savanna Drilling Corp. et al., [2011] A.R. Uned. 399 (Prov. Ct.), consd. [para. 27].

R. v. I.G.L. Canada (Western) Ltd., [2007] A.J. No. 1057 (Prov. Ct.), consd. [para. 27].

R. v. Rose's Well Services Ltd. et al. (2009), 467 A.R. 1; 2009 ABQB 1, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Violette, [2008] B.C.J. No. 2776 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Shalala (R.H.) (2000), 224 N.B.R.(2d) 118; 574 A.P.R. 118 (C.A.), leave to appeal refused (2000), 262 N.R. 400 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Steve's Oilfield Services (Edson) Ltd., [2006] A.R. Uned. 309; 2006 ABPC 137, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Atlantic Towing Ltd. (2010), 295 N.S.R.(2d) 124; 935 A.P.R. 124; 2010 NSPC 58, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Ledcor Industries Ltd. (2004), 368 A.R. 1; 2004 ABPC 141, refd to. [para. 34].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 11(a) [para. 24].

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 581(3) [para. 23]; sect. 587(1)(f) [para. 1].

Counsel:

Alex Keaveny, for the Crown;

Brad Proctor, for the defendant.

This application was heard on March 10, 2016, before Derrick, P.C.J., of the Nova Scotia Provincial Court, who delivered the following decision on March 31, 2016.