R. v. Wilson, (1977) 2 A.R. 351 (CA)

• Judge: McGillivray, C.J.A., Clement and Morrow, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: January 12, 1977
• Citations: (1977), 2 A.R. 351 (CA)

R. v. Wilson (1977), 2 A.R. 351 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Wilson

Indexed As: R. v. Wilson

Alberta Supreme Court

Appellate Division

McGillivray, C.J.A., Clement and Morrow, JJ.A.

January 12, 1977.

Summary:

This case arose out of a charge against the accused of making a false statement in an extra-judicial proceeding contrary to s. 122 of the Criminal Code. The accused made and filed an affidavit in a civil proceeding to be used in an ex parte application to the Alberta Supreme Court, Trial Division. The affidavit was alleged to contain a false statement and the accused was charged with making a false statement in an extra-judicial proceeding. The trial court dismissed the information on the ground that the accused did not fall within the terms of s. 122, because he was a witness in a judicial proceeding within the meaning of s. 120. The Crown appealed.

The Alberta Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. The Court of Appeal held that prior to its filing the voluntary affidavit was not one "permitted, authorized or required" to be made within the meaning of s. 122. The Court of Appeal stated that upon the filing of the affidavit the accused became a witness in a judicial proceeding within the meaning of s. 120.

Criminal Law - Topic 483

Offences against the administration of justice - False statements in extrajudicial proceedings - What constitutes - Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, s. 122 - The accused made and filed an affidavit in a civil proceeding to be used in an ex parte application to the Alberta Supreme Court, Trial Division - The Alberta Court of Appeal held that the voluntary affidavit was not one "permitted, authorized or required" to be made within the meaning of s. 122 - The Court of Appeal held that the accused was properly acquitted of a charge under s. 122 of making a false statement in an extra-judicial proceeding.

Criminal Law - Topic 503

Offences against the administration of justice - Perjury - Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, s. 120 - What constitutes a witness - The accused made and filed an affidavit in a civil proceeding to be used in an ex parte application to the Alberta Supreme Court, Trial Division - The Alberta Court of Appeal stated that the accused became a witness in a judicial proceeding, when his affidavit was filed - See paragraph 8.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Boisjoly (1971), 5 C.C.C.(2d) 309, appld. [para. 5].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 107, sect. 120, sect. 121 [para. 3]; sect. 122 [para. 1]; sect. 122.1(1) [para. 5].

Rules of Court (Alta.), rule 298, rule 310, rule 313 [para. 8].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Blackstone's Commentaries (1769) [para. 7].

Counsel:

Robert B. Nelles, for the Crown appellant;

C.S. Brooker, for the respondent.

This case was heard before McGILLIVRAY, C.J.A., CLEMENT and MORROW, JJ.A., of the Alberta Supreme Court, Appellate Division.

On January 12, 1977, CLEMENT, J.A., delivered the following judgment of the Appellate Division: