Ontario Criminal

Charter of Rights

Constitutional challenge to Mutual Legal Assistance dismissed

V and L were subject of ex parte applications for gathering and sending orders under ss. 18 and 20 of Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act. V and L argued that ex parte presumption for those proceedings violated ss. 7 and 8 of Charter. Application judge dismissed application for declaration of invalidity. Appeal dismissed. Applications for gathering and sending orders were investigative and not adjudicative proceedings. Ex parte presumption was for valid policy reasons including need for confidentiality and expedition. Act contained sufficient safeguards to comply with ss. 7 and 8 of Charter.

United States of America v. Viscomi (Jun. 30, 2015, Ont. C.A., Janet Simmons J.A., E.A. Cronk J.A., and R.A. Blair J.A., File No. CA C57211, C57910, C59973, C59982) Decision at 120 W.C.B. (2d) 538 was affirmed. Decision at 107 W.C.B. (2d) 377 was reversed.  123 W.C.B. (2d) 347.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?