R. v. Sharkey, (1983) 50 A.R. 39 (NWTSC)

JudgeMarshall, J.
CourtSupreme Court of Northwest Territories (Canada)
Case DateAugust 02, 1983
JurisdictionNorthwest Territories
Citations(1983), 50 A.R. 39 (NWTSC)

R. v. Sharkey (1983), 50 A.R. 39 (NWTSC)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Sharkey, Slaven, J., and Fisher

(SC 2859)

Indexed As: R. v. Sharkey, Slaven, J., and Fisher

Northwest Territories Supreme Court

Marshall, J.

November 2, 1983.

Summary:

The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle while prohibited from driving, contrary to s. 53(7) of the Vehicles Ordinance. The Northwest Territories Territorial Court, in a judgment not reported in this series of reports, dismissed the charge without argument from counsel, because the accused had not been given an opportunity to make a voluntary payment. The Crown applied for a mandamus to compel the hearing of the charge.

The Northwest Territories Supreme Court dismissed the application, and held that the Crown's only remedy was an appeal.

Administrative Law - Topic 3586

Judicial review - Mandamus - Bars - Existence of alternate remedy - An accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle while prohibited from driving, contrary to s. 53(7) of the Vehicles Ordinance - The trial judge dismissed the charge without argument from counsel, because the accused had not been given an opportunity to make voluntary payment - The Northwest Territories Supreme Court dismissed the Crown's application for mandamus to compel the hearing of the charge, because the proper remedy was an appeal where the trial judge did not decline jurisdiction, but dismissed the charge on the law as he saw it.

Cases Noticed:

Cheyenne Realty Ltd. v. Thompson et al., [1975] 1 S.C.R. 87; 1 N.R. 273, consd. [para. 9].

Hickman v. Marshall (1960), 127 C.C.C. 76 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [paras. 10, 15].

R. v. Smith (1973), 6 N.B.R.(2d) 494; 16 C.C.C.(2d) 11 (N.B.C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

Bolduc v. Attorney General of Quebec et al. (1982), 43 N.R. 185; 68 C.C.C.(2d) 413, refd to. [para. 10].

Kipp v. Attorney General for the Province of Ontario, [1965] S.C.R. 57, dist. [paras. 11 to 14].

Counsel:

B. Fontaine, for the applicant;

W. Wilkins, for the respondents.

This application was heard on August 2, 1983, at Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, before Marshall, J., of the Northwest Territories Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on November 2, 1983:

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • R. v. D.S., (1996) 150 Sask.R. 113 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • December 12, 1996
    ...(B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 20]. Lapinsky, Re (1965), 47 C.R. 346 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 21]. R. v. Sharkey, Slaven, J. and Fisher (1983), 50 A.R. 39 (N.W.T.S.C.), refd to. [para. B.J. Bauer, for the Crown; S.E. Halyk, Q.C., for the respondent. This application was heard before Klebuc,......
1 cases
  • R. v. D.S., (1996) 150 Sask.R. 113 (QB)
    • Canada
    • Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • December 12, 1996
    ...(B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 20]. Lapinsky, Re (1965), 47 C.R. 346 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 21]. R. v. Sharkey, Slaven, J. and Fisher (1983), 50 A.R. 39 (N.W.T.S.C.), refd to. [para. B.J. Bauer, for the Crown; S.E. Halyk, Q.C., for the respondent. This application was heard before Klebuc,......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT