R. v. Wong, (1977) 2 A.R. 173 (CA)

• Judge: McDermid, Prowse and Haddad, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (Alberta)
• Case Date: January 25, 1977
• Citations: (1977), 2 A.R. 173 (CA)

R. v. Wong (1977), 2 A.R. 173 (CA)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Wong

Indexed As: R. v. Wong

Alberta Supreme Court

Appellate Division

McDermid, Prowse and Haddad, JJ.A.

January 25, 1977.

Summary:

This case arose out of a charge of knowingly permitting the operation of a common bawdy-house contrary to s. 193 of the Criminal Code. The accused was a landlord who leased an apartment in his commercial building to a person who used the apartment as a common bawdy-house. The landlord was charged with keeping a common bawdy-house because he knew of the use being made of the apartment and did not terminate the lease. The trial judge acquitted the accused.

On appeal by way of trial de novo to the District Court the appeal was dismissed and the acquittal of the accused was affirmed.

On appeal to the Alberta Court of Appeal the appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the District Court was affirmed. The Alberta Court of Appeal held that the accused did not have "charge or control" of the apartment at any time material to the charge. The Alberta Court of Appeal stated that the accused only had the right to acquire charge or control. The Alberta Court of Appeal stated that s. 193 of the Criminal Code is directed at persons in actual charge or control of premises being used as a bawdy-house - see paragraph 13.

Criminal Law - Topic 875

Disorderly houses - Bawdy-houses - Meaning of "charge or control" - Criminal Code, s. 193(2) - A landlord leased an apartment in a commercial building to a person who used the apartment as a common bawdy-house - The landlord was charged with keeping a common bawdy-house because he knew of the use being made of the apartment and did not terminate the lease - The Alberta Court of Appeal affirmed the acquittal of the accused because as landlord he did not have "charge or control" of the premises - The Alberta Court of Appeal stated that the landlord only had the right to acquire charge or control - See paragraph 13.

Statutes - Topic 2588

Interpretation of words - Limitation on the meaning of words - Words modified by a general expression - The Alberta Court of Appeal stated that when several words are followed by a general expression, which is as much applicable to the first and other words as to the last, then the general expression modifies all the preceding words - See paragraphs 9 and 10.

Words and Phrases

Charge or control - The Alberta Court of Appeal discussed the meaning of the words "charge or control" as found in s. 193(2) of the Criminal Code.

Words and Phrases

Control - The Alberta Court of Appeal discussed the meaning of the word "control" as found in s. 193(2) of the Criminal Code.

Cases Noticed:

Siviour v. Napolitano, [1931] 1 K.B. 636, folld. [para. 14].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 193(2) [para. 2]; sect. 517 [para. 7].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Halsbury's Laws of England (2nd Ed.), vol. 31, p. 496 [para. 9]; vol. 22, p. 12 [para. 12].

Counsel:

A.M. Harradence, Q.C., for the appellant;

Mrs. D.J. Mansell, for the respondent.

The judgment of the Alberta Court of Appeal was delivered by PROWSE, J.A., at Calgary, Alberta on January 25, 1977.