R. v. Watson, Geller and Muttner, (1981) 10 Man.R.(2d) 340 (CA)

• Judge: Matas, Hall and O'Sullivan, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Manitoba)
• Case Date: January 09, 1981
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: (1981), 10 Man.R.(2d) 340 (CA)

R. v. Watson (1981), 10 Man.R.(2d) 340 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Watson, Geller and Muttner

Indexed As: R. v. Watson, Geller and Muttner

Manitoba Court of Appeal

Matas, Hall and O'Sullivan, JJ.A.

January 9, 1981.

Summary:

The accused applied to have informations quashed which charged them with contributing to a juvenile delinquency. The applications were dismissed by two provincial court judges. The accused appealed.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, in a judgment reported in 6 Man.R.(2d) 351, dismissed the appeals. The accused appealed.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeals and quashed the informations.

Criminal Law - Topic 8709

Juveniles - Juvenile delinquent defined - The Manitoba Court of Appeal discussed the meaning of the phrase "or who is guilty of sexual immorality or any similar form of vice" and the clause "or who is liable by reason of any other act to be committed to an industrial school or juvenile reformatory under any federal or provincial statute" in the definition of juvenile delinquent in s. 2(1) of the Juvenile Delinquents Act - See paragraphs 11 to 20.

Criminal Law - Topic 8709

Juveniles - Juvenile delinquent defined - The Manitoba Court of Appeal held that sniffing intoxicants was not an act that resulted in a juvenile delinquency within s. 2(1) of the Juvenile Delinquents Act.

Criminal Law - Topic 8667

Juveniles - Contributing to delinquency of - Producing, promoting or contributing - Meaning of - The accused were each charged with contributing to a juvenile delinquency by selling sniffing intoxicants (paint thinners and cement cleaners) to children - The Manitoba Court of Appeal quashed the informations, because they did not disclose any offence at law - The court held that, because it was not illegal to sell paint thinners or cement cleaners, per se, and that sniffing intoxicants did not make a child a juvenile delinquent within s. 2(1) of the Juvenile Delinquents Act, the accused could not be guilty of contributing to a juvenile delinquency.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Pandiak (1967), 61 W.W.R.(N.S.) 207 (Alta. S.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

R. v. Mack (1973), 11 C.C.C.(2d) 386 (Sask. P.M.C.), refd to. [para. 10].

Marcotte v. Deputy Attorney General of Canada (1974), 3 N.R. 613; 51 D.L.R.(3d) 259 (S.C.C.), folld. [para. 14].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Bill of Rights, R.S.C. 1970, App. 3 [para. 6].

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 168(1) [para. 15].

Child Welfare Act, R.S.M. 1970, c. C-80 [para. 18].

Juvenile Delinquents Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. J-3, sect. 2(1) [para. 4]; sect. 33(1) [para. 3]; sect. 38 [para. 13].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Parker, Graham, Glue Sniffing (1968-69), 11 Cr.L.Q. 175 [para. 14].

Counsel:

M.S. Minuk, for the appellant Watson;

R.R. Edge, for the appellants Geller and Muttner;

W.W. Morton, Q.C., and L.H. Kee, for the respondent Attorney General of Manitoba;

D.G. Frayer, for the respondent Attorney General of Canada.

This case was heard on October 23, 1980, by MATAS, HALL and O'SULLIVAN, JJ.A., of the Manitoba Court of Appeal.

On January 9, 1981, the judgment for the Court of Appeal was delivered and the following opinions filed:

MATAS, J.A. - see paragraphs 1 to 21;

O'SULLIVAN, J.A. - see paragraphs 22 to 27.

HALL, J.A., concurred with MATAS, J.A.