Docket
29234
Réjean Demers v. Her Majesty the Queen
(Quebec) (Criminal) (By Leave)
Judgments on applications for leave to appeal are rendered by the Court, but are not necessarily unanimous.
| Date | Proceeding | Filed By (if applicable) |
|---|---|---|
| 2004-07-21 | Appeal closed | |
| 2004-07-02 | Judgment on appeal and notice of deposit of judgment sent to all parties | |
| 2004-06-30 | Judgment on the appeal rendered, CJ Ia Ma Ba Bi Arb LeB De F, The appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court of Quebec, Number 200-36-000893-016, dated April 2, 2002, heard on January 21, 2004, is allowed. Sections 672.33, 672.54 and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code are overbroad and violate the rights, guaranteed by s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, of permanently unfit accused who do not pose a significant threat to society. The impugned provisions are declared invalid and the declaration of invalidity is suspended for a period of 12 months. If after 12 months Parliament does not cure the unconstitutionality of the regime, accused who qualify can ask for a stay of proceedings. The constitutional questions are answered as follows: 1. Does the application of ss. 672.33, 672.54 and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, to persons found unfit to stand trial on account of permanent mental disorder overstep the legislative jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada under the Constitution Act, 1867? Answer: No. LeBel J. would answer yes. 2. Do ss. 672.33, 672.54 and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code infringe the rights and freedoms guaranteed by s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on the ground that they deprive persons who have been found unfit to stand trial of their right to liberty and security of the person in a manner that is not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice? Answer: Yes. 3. If so, are the infringements reasonable limits that can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under s. 1 of the Charter? Answer: No. The legislation's overbreadth causes it to fail the minimal impairment branch of the s. 1 analysis. 4. Do ss. 672.33, 672.54 and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code infringe the rights and freedoms guaranteed by s. 11(d) of the Charter on the ground that they deprive persons who have been found unfit to stand trial of the right to be presumed innocent? Answer: It is unnecessary to answer this question. 5. If so, are the infringements reasonable limits that can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under s. 1 of the Charter? Answer: It is unnecessary to answer this question. 6. Do ss. 672.33, 672.54 and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code infringe the rights and freedoms guaranteed by s. 15(1) of the Charter on the ground that they create discrimination against persons with a mental disability who have been found unfit to stand trial? Answer: It is unnecessary to answer this question. 7. If so, are the infringements reasonable limits that can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under s. 1 of the Charter? Answer: It is unnecessary to answer this question. Allowed |
|
| 2004-02-10 | Transcript received, (87 pages) | |
| 2004-01-21 | Judgment reserved OR rendered with reasons to follow | |
| 2004-01-21 | Hearing of the appeal, 2004-01-21, CJ Ia Ma Ba Bi Arb LeB De F Judgment reserved |
|
| 2004-01-21 | Appeal hearing scheduled, 2004-01-21 Judgment reserved |
|
| 2004-01-21 | Acknowledgement and consent for video taping of proceedings, from all parties | |
| 2004-01-13 | Notice of appearance, from R. Frater | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2004-01-05 | Notice of appearance, (Suzanne Gagné and Stépahne Lepage will be present at hearing.) | Réjean Demers |
| 2004-01-05 | Book of authorities, (Supplemental Authorities), Completed on: 2004-01-05 | Attorney General of Ontario |
| 2004-01-05 | Intervener's factum, (Supplemental factum as per Chief Justice's Order of Nov 4/03), Completed on: 2004-01-05 | Attorney General of Ontario |
| 2003-12-30 | Book of authorities, (Supplemental authorities - Original of proof of service rec'd Jan. 9/04), Completed on: 2003-12-30 | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2003-12-30 | Intervener's factum, (Supplemental factum as per Chief Justice's Order of Nov 4/03 - Original of proof of service rec'd Jan. 9/04), Completed on: 2004-01-07 | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2003-12-17 | Respondent's book of authorities, (Supplemental Authorities as per Chief Justice's Order of Nov. 4/03) original proof of service rec'd Jan. 8/04, Completed on: 2003-12-17 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2003-12-17 | Respondent's factum, (Supplemental factum as per Chief Justice's Order of Nov. 4/03) original proof of service rec'd Jan. 8/04, Completed on: 2003-12-17 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2003-11-25 | Appellant's book of authorities, (Supplementary) (service on respondent missing), Completed on: 2003-12-01 | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-11-25 | Appellant's factum, (Supplementary factum as per Chief Justice's Order of Nov. 4/03) (service on respondent missing), Completed on: 2003-12-01 | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-11-24 | Notice of hearing sent to parties | |
| 2003-11-05 | Notice of constitutional question(s) | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-11-04 | Order on motion to state a constitutional question, (BY CHIEF JUSTICE) | |
| 2003-11-04 | Decision on the motion to state a constitutional question, CJ, Does the application of ss. 672.33, 672.54 and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C 46, to persons found unfit to stand trial on account of permanent mental disorder overstep the legislative jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada under the Constitution Act, 1867? 1. Any notices of intervention relating to the additional constitutional question shall be served and filed on or before November 19, 2003. Attorneys General who have already intervened in this appeal pursuant to Rule 61(4) of the Rules of the Supreme Court need not file an additional notice of intervention; 2. The appellant's supplementary factum relating to the additional constitutional question shall be served and filed on or before November 26, 2003; 3. The respondent's supplementary factum relating to the additional constitutional question shall be served and filed on or before December 17, 2003; 4. Any interveners' supplementary factum relating to the additional constitutional question shall be served and filed on or before January 5, 2004; 5. This appeal shall be heard on January 21, 2004. Granted |
|
| 2003-10-22 | Submission of motion to state a constitutional question, CJ | |
| 2003-10-22 | Response to the motion to state a constitutional question, (Letter Form), from S. Roussel dated October 22, 2003 (fax copy), Completed on: 2003-10-22 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2003-10-17 | Motion to state a constitutional question, Completed on: 2003-10-17 | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-10-16 | Judgment on appeal and notice of deposit of judgment sent to all parties | |
| 2003-10-15 | Order on motion to adduce new evidence | |
| 2003-10-08 | Decision on motion to adduce new evidence, Ia Ba Bi Arb LeB De F Allowed |
|
| 2003-10-08 | Judgment on the appeal rendered, Ia Ba Bi Arb LeB De F, After examining the record and reviewing the constitutional questions submitted by the appellant, it seems to the Court that the latter do not completely reflect all of the constitutional problems potentially raised by the appeal. It is possible that an examination of these problems will also require a consideration of problems relating to the constitutional validity of the provisions in question, in light of the division of powers between Parliament and the provincial legislatures. In these circumstances, the Court considers it necessary that all those concerned be informed more precisely of what is potentially at stake in this appeal. The Court also notes the problem of consistency between the English and French versions of section 672.63 of the Criminal Code and would like the parties to address it in any representations they may make. Accordingly: 1.The Court adjourns the hearing of the appeal to a date to be determined. 2.The appellant shall reformulate the constitutional questions so as to include the necessary information concerning any division of powers problems that may be raised by the appeal and submit these amendments to the Court by October 23, 2003. 3. After the constitutional questions have been approved, the necessary procedure and schedule will be determined and communicated to the parties and the interveners. Adjourned |
|
| 2003-10-08 | Acknowledgement and consent for video taping of proceedings, Consent of all parties | |
| 2003-10-08 | Hearing of the motion to adduce new evidence, 2003-10-08, Ia Ba Bi Arb LeB De F Decision rendered |
|
| 2003-10-08 | Hearing of the appeal, 2003-10-08, Ia Ba Bi Arb LeB De F Adjourned |
|
| 2003-10-07 | Submission of motion to adduce new evidence, 2003-10-08, Ia Ba Bi Arb LeB De F Decision rendered |
|
| 2003-10-07 | Supplemental document, (new evidence - book form)(sent to the judges on Oct. 7, 2003) | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-10-07 | Motion to adduce new evidence, (sent to the judges on Oct. 7, 2003), Completed on: 2003-10-07 | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-10-06 | Appellant's condensed book | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-09-23 | Notice of appearance, from R. Frater | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2003-09-16 | Notice of appearance | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2003-09-02 | Notice of appearance, of the Appellant dated Sept. 2/03 | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-08-29 | Notice of hearing sent to parties | |
| 2003-08-28 | Appeal hearing scheduled, 2003-10-08, (previously Nov. 5) Adjourned |
|
| 2003-08-06 | Appeal perfected for hearing | |
| 2003-08-05 | Book of authorities, Completed on: 2003-08-05 | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2003-08-05 | Intervener's factum, Completed on: 2003-08-05 | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2003-07-18 | Book of authorities, Completed on: 2003-07-18 | Attorney General of Ontario |
| 2003-07-10 | Intervener's factum, (service on Tribunal administratif requested), Completed on: 2003-07-14 | Attorney General of Ontario |
| 2003-06-26 | Respondent's book of authorities, Completed on: 2003-06-26 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2003-06-26 | Respondent's record, Completed on: 2003-06-26 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2003-06-26 | Respondent's factum, (service on Tribunal administratif requested), Completed on: 2003-07-21 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2003-05-06 | Appellant's record, vol. 1 to 3, Completed on: 2003-05-15 | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-05-06 | Appellant's book of authorities, vol. 1 and 2, Completed on: 2003-05-15 | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-05-06 | Appellant's factum, Completed on: 2003-05-15 | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-03-17 | Notice of intervention respecting a constitutional question | Attorney General of Canada |
| 2003-02-19 | Notice of intervention respecting a constitutional question | Attorney General of Ontario |
| 2003-02-17 | Notice of constitutional question(s) | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-02-17 | Order on motion to state a constitutional question | |
| 2003-02-13 | Decision on the motion to state a constitutional question, Interventions by March 17, 2003, CJ, 1. Do ss. 672.33, 672.54 and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, infringe the rights and freedoms guaranteed by s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on the ground that they deprive persons who have been found unfit to stand trial of their right to liberty and security of the person in a manner that is not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice? 2. If so, are the infringements reasonable limits that can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under s. 1 of the Charter? 3. Do ss. 672.33, 672.54 and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code infringe the rights and freedoms guaranteed by s. 11(d) of the Charter on the ground that they deprive persons who have been found unfit to stand trial of the right to be presumed innocent? 4. If so, are the infringements reasonable limits that can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under s. 1 of the Charter? 5. Do ss. 672.33, 672.54 and 672.81(1) of the Criminal Code infringe the rights and freedoms guaranteed by s. 15(1) of the Charter on the ground that they create discrimination against persons with a mental disability who have been found unfit to stand trial? 6. If so, are the infringements reasonable limits that can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society under s. 1 of the Charter? Allowed in part |
|
| 2003-02-07 | Submission of motion to state a constitutional question, CJ | |
| 2003-01-20 | Response to the motion to state a constitutional question, (Letter Form), letter from Sylvie Roussel dated 01/20/03, Completed on: 2003-01-20 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2003-01-09 | Notice of change of counsel, de/from Bertrand & Ass. à/to Létourneau & Gagné | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-01-09 | Notice of appeal, Completed on: 2003-01-09 | Réjean Demers |
| 2003-01-09 | Motion to state a constitutional question, Completed on: 2003-01-09 | Réjean Demers |
| 2002-12-13 | Judgment on leave sent to the parties | |
| 2002-12-12 | Judgment of the Court on the application for leave to appeal, The application for leave to appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court of Quebec, Number 200-36-000893-016, dated April 2, 2002, is granted. Granted |
|
| 2002-11-04 | All materials on application for leave submitted to the Judges, CJ Ba De | |
| 2002-07-16 | Letter acknowledging receipt of an incomplete application for leave to appeal | |
| 2002-07-03 | Applicant's reply to respondent's argument, Completed on: 2002-07-03 | Réjean Demers |
| 2002-06-27 | Respondent's response on the application for leave to appeal, Completed on: 2002-06-27 | Her Majesty the Queen |
| 2002-06-03 | Application for leave to appeal, (vol. 1 à 3), Reçu 50$ le 19 juillet 2002., Completed on: 2002-07-19 | Réjean Demers |
- Date modified: