R. v. Olah, Brooks, Gomes and Fong, (1979) 4 Sask.R. 62 (CA)

• Judge: Culliton, C.J.S., Woods and Brownridge, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
• Case Date: March 20, 1979
• Jurisdiction: Saskatchewan
• Citations: (1979), 4 Sask.R. 62 (CA)

R. v. Olah (1979), 4 Sask.R. 62 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Olah, Brooks, Gomes and Fong

(Nos. 8075; 8076; 8078)

Indexed As: R. v. Olah, Brooks, Gomes and Fong

Saskatchewan Court of Appeal

Culliton, C.J.S., Woods and Brownridge, JJ.A.

March 20, 1979.

Summary:

This case arose out of several charges against several accused of conspiracy to evade payment of income tax by overstating, for the purpose of tax deductions, the value of gifts of paintings to the Crown. The trial court convicted the accused and imposed sentences of imprisonment. The accused appealed to the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals and affirmed the convictions of the accused and the sentences imposed by the trial court.

Criminal Law - Topic 4482

Procedure - Trials - Joint or separate trials for two or more persons - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal referred to circumstances which justified the joint trial of four persons charged with conspiracy - See paragraphs 15 and 16.

Criminal Law - Topic 5212

Evidence - Relevancy - Similar acts - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal referred to the general principles which governed the admissibility of evidence of similar acts in criminal cases - See paragraph 17 - The Court of Appeal stated that evidence of similar acts may be offered by the Crown in a criminal case to rebut defences such as ignorance, accident, mistake or an innocent state of mind - See paragraph 18 - The Court of Appeal referred to circumstances when similar act evidence was relevant and admissible - See paragraphs 22 to 24.

Civil Rights - Topic 4612

Right to counsel - Waiver or abandonment of - During a criminal trial the accused dismissed his counsel - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal stated that the accused had a right to proceed without counsel - See paragraph 33.

Civil Rights - Topic 4635

Right to counsel - Appointment of counsel by court - Duty of trial judge - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal stated that there is no obligation on a trial judge to appoint counsel for an accused in the absence of a request for counsel by the accused or a suggestion that the accused is unable to proceed without counsel - See paragraph 33.

Criminal Law - Topic 4485

Procedure - Trial - Adjournments - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal referred to circumstances which justified a refusal by a trial judge to grant a request for an adjournment by an accused to obtain the attendance of a witness - See paragraphs 39 to 48 - The Court of Appeal stated that such a refusal must not prejudice an accused or deny the accused an opportunity to make a full answer and defence - See paragraph 45.

Income Tax - Topic 9684

Tax evasion - Punishments - Sentence, imprisonment - Charge of conspiracy to evade taxes by overstating, for the purpose of tax deductions, the value of gifts to the Crown - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal affirmed the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment of two years less a day for three accused and a sentence of imprisonment of 12 months for another accused - See paragraphs 6, 57 and 58.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Quiring and Kuipers (1974), 27 C.R.N.S. 367, refd to. [para. 15].

Noor Mohamed v. The King, [1949] A.C. 182, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. Guay (1978), 23 N.R. 451, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Doughty (1965), 49 C.A.R. 110, refd to. [para. 21].

R. v. Gregg, [1965] 3 C.C.C. 203, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Grimaldi (No. 2), [1979] 1 W.W.R. 554, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Vescio, [1949] S.C.R. 139, refd to. [para. 55].

Statutes Noticed:

Income Tax Act, S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63, sect. 110(1)(b) [para. 1]; sect. 239(1)(d), sect. 239(1)(c) [para. 2].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Phipson on Evidence (11th Ed.), para. 452 [para. 17]; para. 471 [para. 19].

Counsel:

Gordon J. Kuski, for the appellant, Fong;

E.F. Anthony Merchant, for the appellant, Olah, Jr.;

James A. Griffin, Q.C. and Julia Y.N. Lee, for the appellant, Gomes;

John A. Scollin and Spencer Ronald Fainstein, for the Crown.

This appeal was heard by CULLITON, C.J.S., WOODS and BROWNRIDGE, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal was delivered by CULLITON, C.J.S, at Regina, Saskatchewan, on March 20, 1979.