R. v. Zingre, Wuest and Reiser

• Jurisdiction: Federal Jurisdiction (Canada)
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Judge: Laskin, C.J.C., Martland, Ritchie, Dickson, Beetz, Estey, McIntyre, Chouinard and Lamer, JJ.
• Citation: (1981), 38 N.R. 272 (SCC),38 NR 272,61 CCC (2d) 465,127 DLR (3d) 223,[1981] 2 SCR 392,23 CPC 259,6 WCB 415,1981 CanLII 32 (SCC),10 Man R (2d) 62,[1981] SCJ No 89 (QL)
• Date: 28 September 1981
• Subject Matter: PRACTICE

R. v. Zingre (1981), 38 N.R. 272 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

R. v. Zingre, Wuest and Reiser

Indexed As: R. v. Zingre, Wuest and Reiser

Supreme Court of Canada

Laskin, C.J.C., Martland, Ritchie, Dickson, Beetz, Estey, McIntyre, Chouinard and Lamer, JJ.

September 28, 1981.

Summary:

Criminal charges were laid in Canada against several Swiss citizens who could not be extradited from Switzerland. Subsequently Canada requested that the accused be prosecuted in Switzerland respecting the crimes committed in Canada. In order for the Swiss investigating authorities to take evidence in Canada an order of commission authorized such authorities to take testimony in Manitoba. Later the judge who granted the order set aside the order. The Crown appealed against the second order to the Manitoba Court of Appeal.

The Manitoba Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and restored the order of commission authorizing the Swiss authorities to take testimony in Manitoba. The judgment of the Manitoba Court of Appeal is set out below - See paragraphs 45 to 58. The accused appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal.

Practice - Topic 3748

Evidence - Letters rogatory - When evidence will be taken in jurisdiction receiving request - Criminal charges were laid in Canada against several Swiss citizens who could not be extradited - Canada requested that the accused be prosecuted in Switzerland respecting the crimes committed in Canada - Swiss investigating authorities requested that two "extraordinary investigating judges" be authorized to take testimony in Canada in respect of the prosecution - The Supreme Court of Canada considered Canada's obligations under a relevant treaty and affirmed an order granting the request.

Practice - Topic 3748

Evidence - Letters rogatory - When evidence will be taken in jurisdiction receiving request - The Supreme Court of Canada referred to circumstances when a Canadian court can grant a request from a foreign country for examination of a witness for use in pretrial proceedings in the foreign country (see paragraphs 22 to 25).

Practice - Topic 3748

Evidence - Letters rogatory - When evidence will be taken in jurisdiction receiving request - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that Canadian courts in considering a request from a foreign country must consider any relevant treaty obligations between Canada and the foreign country (see paragraph 40).

Practice - Topic 3748

Evidence - Letters rogatory - The Supreme Court of Canada referred to circumstances when Canadian courts will refuse a request from a foreign country for examination of a witness for use in foreign proceedings (see paragraph 19).

Cases Noticed:

Re Geneva v. Comtesse, [1959] O.R. 668, refd to. [para. 13].

Schooner Exchange v. M'Fadden & Others (1812-1813), 7 Cranch's Reports 116, refd to. [para. 17].

Gulf Oil Corporation v. Gulf Oil Canada Limited et al., 31 N.R. 451; [1980] 2 S.C.R. 39, refd to. [para. 18].

Re Radio Corporation of America v. The Rauland Corporation et al., [1956] O.R. 630, refd to. [para. 19].

Radio Corporation of America v. Rauland Corporation, [1956] 1 Q.B. 618, refd to. [para. 19].

Re Request for International Judicial Assistance (1979), 49 C.C.C.(2d) 276, refd to. [para. 19].

Re Uszinska and Republic of France (1980), 52 C.C.C.(2d) 39, refd to. [para. 19].

Re Application by Letters Rogatory from United States District Court, Middle District of Florida, 21 A.R. 271; [1980] 1 W.W.R. 7, refd to. [para. 20].

Re Kirchoffer v. The Imperial Loan and Investment Company (1904), 7 O.L.R. 295, refd to. [para. 22].

Re Isler (1915), 34 O.L.R. 375, refd to. [para. 23].

R. v. Dzambas (1973), 24 C.R.N.S. 118, refd to. [para. 43].

Statutes Noticed:

Canada Evidence Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. E-10, sect. 40, sect. 43, sect. 48 [para. 12].

Authors and Works Noticed:

David, René, English Law and French Law (1980), page 65 [para. 23].

Counsel:

K.P. Regier, Q.C., and A. Stewart, for the appellant Zingre;

H. Walsh, Q.C., and P. Walsh, for the appellant Reiser;

J.P. Nelligan, Q.C., J. Chapman, Q.C., and Paul Teskey, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard by LASKIN, C.J.C., MARTLAND, RITCHIE, DICKSON, BEETZ, ESTEY, McINTRYE, CHOUINARD and LAMER, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada at Ottawa, Ontario, on May 11, 1981.

The judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada was delivered by DICKSON, J., on September 28, 1981: