R. v. Skalbania (N.M.), (1996) 80 B.C.A.C. 56 (CA)

• Judge: Rowles, Newbury and Proudfoot, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: September 05, 1996
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (1996), 80 B.C.A.C. 56 (CA)

R. v. Skalbania (N.M.) (1996), 80 B.C.A.C. 56 (CA);

    130 W.A.C. 56

MLB headnote and full text

Regina (appellant) v. Nelson M. Skalbania (respondent)

(CA020677)

Indexed As: R. v. Skalbania (N.M.)

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Rowles, Newbury and Proudfoot, JJ.A.

September 5, 1996.

Summary:

The accused was charged with theft by misappropriation of money held under direc­tion contrary to s. 332(1) of the Criminal Code. The trial judge acquitted the accused. The Crown appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and convicted the accused. The court remitted the matter to the court below for sentencing.

Criminal Law - Topic 1645

Offences against property - Theft - Elements - Intention or mens rea - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that the mens rea for the purpose of s. 332 of the Criminal Code required proof of knowledge that the accused received the money in question, knowledge of the direction attached to it, the intentional application of the funds to another purpose contrary to the direction, and either the intention to deprive another or the knowl­edge that that prohibited act could or would have as a consequence the depriva­tion of another - The latter element imported the moral turpitude suggested by the word "fraudulently" and ensured that a person could not be "branded a thief" for the intentional taking of money or property in contravention of a direction, without more - See paragraphs 12 to 19.

Criminal Law - Topic 1702

Offences against property - Theft - Special types - Misappropriation of money held under direction - The British Colum­bia Court of Appeal set out the elements of the actus reus of theft under s. 332 of the Criminal Code - See paragraph 11.

Criminal Law - Topic 1702

Offences against property - Theft - Special types - Misappropriation of money held under direction - [See Crimi­nal Law - Topic 1645 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4975

Appeals - Indictable offences - Powers of Court of Appeal - Appeal from an acquit­tal - The British Columbia Court of Appeal stated that on an appeal by the Crown, the Court of Appeal may not in­terfere even where the trial court has failed to appreciate evidence unless that failure was "based on a misapprehension of some legal principle" - However, where the trial judge has made an error in legal principle that error "does not cease to be an error in law merely because the trial judge has framed his reasons by stating that the Crown has failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt" - See paragraph 10.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Lampard, [1969] S.C.R. 373, refd to. [para. 9].

R. v. Morin (K.M.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 286; 142 N.R. 141; 131 A.R. 81; 25 W.A.C. 81; 76 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Davis (1973), 14 C.C.C.(2d) 517 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Fischer (1987), 53 Sask.R. 263; 31 C.C.C.(3d) 303 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Lafrance, [1975] 2 S.C.R. 201; 13 C.C.C.(2d) 289, consd. [para. 12].

R. v. Bogner (1975), 33 C.R.N.S. 348 (Que. C.A.), consd. [para. 13].

R. v. Théroux (R.), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 5; 151 N.R. 104; 54 Q.A.C. 184; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 449, refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Long (1990), 61 C.C.C.(3d) 156 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. Williams, [1953] 1 Q.B. 660 (C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Brais (1972), 7 C.C.C.(2d) 301 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Feely, [1973] 1 All E.R. 341 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Lowden, [1982] 2 S.C.R. 60; 42 N.R. 616; 43 A.R. 373; 68 C.C.C.(2d) 531, refd to. [para. 39].

R. v. Kent (H.M.), [1994] 3 S.C.R. 133; 171 N.R. 231; 134 N.S.R.(2d) 81; 383 A.P.R. 81; 92 C.C.C.(3d) 344, refd to. [para. 49].

R. v. Schuldt, [1985] 2 S.C.R. 592; 63 N.R. 241; 38 Man.R.(2d) 257, refd to. [para. 50].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 322(1) [para. 31]; sect. 332 [para. 24]; sect. 676(1)(a) [para. 22].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Ferguson, Gerry A., and Bouck, John C., Canadian Criminal Jury Instructions, p. 6.69-20 [para. 12].

Canada, Law Reform Commission, Crimi­nal Law, Theft and Fraud, Working Paper 19 (1977), pp. 37, 44, 45 [para. 30].

Counsel:

T. Mitchell-Banks, for the Crown;

P. Leask, Q.C., for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on June 20, 1996, at Vancouver, British Columbia, before Rowles, Newbury and Proudfoot, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal.

On September 5, 1996, the judgment of the court was rendered and the following opinions were filed:

Newbury, J.A., (Proudfoot, J.A., concur­ring) - see paragraphs 1 to 19;

Rowles, J.A. - see para­graphs 20 to 59.