Silverstar Energy Inc. et al. v. R., [2004] B.C.T.C. 1115 (SC)

JudgeAllan, J.
CourtSupreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
Case DateAugust 05, 2004
JurisdictionBritish Columbia
Citations[2004] B.C.T.C. 1115 (SC);2004 BCSC 1115

Silverstar Energy Inc. v. R., [2004] B.C.T.C. 1115 (SC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2004] B.C.T.C. TBEd. SE.009

In The Matter Of the Execution of a Search Warrant to Search at 302 - 1505 West 2nd Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia

Silverstar Energy Inc., Long Communications Inc., Beacons Gate Consulting Group Inc. and 1048136 Alberta Ltd. (applicants) v. Her Majesty the Queen and Judicial Justice of the Peace North (respondents)

(023046; 2004 BCSC 1115)

Indexed As: Silverstar Energy Inc. et al. v. R.

British Columbia Supreme Court

Vancouver

Allan, J.

August 20, 2004.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Civil Rights - Topic 1646

Property - Search and seizure - Unreasonable search and seizure defined - See paragraphs 8 to 36.

Civil Rights - Topic 8371

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Destruction of evidence - See paragraphs 37 to 41.

Civil Rights - Topic 8380.6

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Return of seized property - See paragraphs 37 to 41.

Criminal Law - Topic 3093

Special powers - Issue of search warrants - What constitutes reasonable grounds - See paragraphs 8 to 36.

Criminal Law - Topic 3170

Special powers - Power of seizure - Detention or return of things seized - See paragraphs 37 to 41.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Meigs (E.), [2003] B.C.T.C. 1816; 2003 BCSC 1816, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Church of Scientology and Zaharia (1987), 18 O.A.C. 321; 31 C.C.C.(3d) 449 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Garofoli et al., [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1421; 116 N.R. 241; 43 O.A.C. 1; 36 Q.A.C. 161; 60 C.C.C.(3d) 161; 80 C.R.(3d) 317; 50 C.R.R. 206, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Araujo (A.) et al., [2000] 2 S.C.R. 992; 262 N.R. 346; 143 B.C.A.C. 257; 235 W.A.C. 257; 149 C.C.C.(3d) 449; 2000 SCC 65, refd to. [para. 23].

Baron et al. v. Minister of National Revenue et al., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 416; 146 N.R. 270: 78 C.C.C.(3d) 510; 18 C.R.(4th) 274, refd to. [para. 24].

R. v. Morris (W.R.) (1998), 173 N.S.R.(2d) 1; 527 A.P.R. 1; 134 C.C.C.(3d) 539 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 24].

R. v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (1993), 77 C.C.C.(3d) 341; 17 C.R.(4th) 198 (Ont. Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Kokesch, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 3; 121 N.R. 161; 61 C.C.C.(3d) 207; 1 C.R.(4th) 62; [1991] 1 W.W.R. 193; 51 B.C.L.R.(2d) 157; 50 C.R.R. 285, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Russell (M.C.) et al. (1999), 24 B.C.T.C. 321 (S.C.), refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Debot (1989), 17 O.A.C. 141; 30 C.C.C.(3d) 207; 54 C.R.(3d) 120; 26 C.R.R. 275 (C.A.), affd. [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1140; 102 N.R. 161; 37 O.A.C. 1; 52 C.C.C.(3d) 193; 73 C.R.(3d) 129, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. Huggett (1978), 42 C.C.C.(2d) 198; 4 C.R.(3d) 208 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Olan, Hudson and Hartnett, [1978] 2 S.C.R. 1175; 21 N.R. 50; 41 C.C.C.(2d) 145, refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Burnett et al., [1985] 2 C.T.C. 227 (Ont. H.C.), refd to. [para. 33].

Dobney Foundry Ltd. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1987] 1 W.W.R. 281; 29 C.C.C.(3d) 285 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 38].

Domtar Inc., Re (1995), 33 C.R.R.(2d) 161 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 40].

R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326; 130 N.R. 277; 120 A.R. 161; 8 W.A.C. 161; 68 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 8 C.R.(4th) 277, refd to. [para. 41].

Counsel:

H. Roderick Anderson and Renee Reichelt, for the applicants;

T. Gerhart, for the respondents.

This application was heard on July 30 and August 5, 2004, before Allan, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following decision on August 20, 2004.

Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • R. v. Ling (M.D.), (2009) 266 B.C.A.C. 281 (CA)
    • Canada
    • British Columbia Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • November 28, 2008
    ...155; 810 A.P.R. 155; 155 C.R.R.(2d) 49; 2007 NSCA 51, refd to. [para. 33]. Silverstar Energy Inc. et al. v. R., [2004] B.C.T.C. 1115; 2004 BCSC 1115, refd to. [para. 33]. R. v. Lyon (G.W.), [2002] B.C.T.C. 1212; 2002 BCSC 1212, refd to. [para. 33]. R. v. Maxwell (R.W.), [2004] B.C.T.C. 1200......
  • R. v. Snider (J.E.), [2012] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1906 (SC)
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • December 12, 2012
    ...to the "criminal" aspects of the information, rather than "innocent" aspects, relying, inter alia , on R. v. Silverstar Energy Inc ., 2004 BCSC 1115. I accept the submission of Crown counsel that any such rule was rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada in Caissey . That case makes it clear......
  • Lemare Lake Logging Ltd. v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests and Range) et al., [2011] B.C.T.C. Uned. 903
    • Canada
    • British Columbia Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • July 7, 2011
    ...despite having been in possession of the copies for more than a year. [52] The respondents have referred to R. v. Silverstar Energy Inc , 2004 BCSC 1115. In that case, Allan J. wrote at paras. 38-39: [38] The Crown requests a reasonable period of time before it is obliged to return the copi......
3 cases
  • R. v. Ling (M.D.), (2009) 266 B.C.A.C. 281 (CA)
    • Canada
    • British Columbia Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
    • November 28, 2008
    ...155; 810 A.P.R. 155; 155 C.R.R.(2d) 49; 2007 NSCA 51, refd to. [para. 33]. Silverstar Energy Inc. et al. v. R., [2004] B.C.T.C. 1115; 2004 BCSC 1115, refd to. [para. 33]. R. v. Lyon (G.W.), [2002] B.C.T.C. 1212; 2002 BCSC 1212, refd to. [para. 33]. R. v. Maxwell (R.W.), [2004] B.C.T.C. 1200......
  • R. v. Snider (J.E.), [2012] B.C.T.C. Uned. 1906 (SC)
    • Canada
    • Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • December 12, 2012
    ...to the "criminal" aspects of the information, rather than "innocent" aspects, relying, inter alia , on R. v. Silverstar Energy Inc ., 2004 BCSC 1115. I accept the submission of Crown counsel that any such rule was rejected by the Supreme Court of Canada in Caissey . That case makes it clear......
  • Lemare Lake Logging Ltd. v. British Columbia (Minister of Forests and Range) et al., [2011] B.C.T.C. Uned. 903
    • Canada
    • British Columbia Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
    • July 7, 2011
    ...despite having been in possession of the copies for more than a year. [52] The respondents have referred to R. v. Silverstar Energy Inc , 2004 BCSC 1115. In that case, Allan J. wrote at paras. 38-39: [38] The Crown requests a reasonable period of time before it is obliged to return the copi......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT