Summary

Keywords

Criminal law - Appeals - Interlocutory judgment - Certiorari - Jurisdiction - Impaired driving - Disclosure - Whether court exceeds its jurisdiction by ordering Crown to inquire into existence of documents not characterized as “fruits of investigation” of which defence seeks disclosure on basis of St-Onge Lamoureux, [2012] 3 S.C.R. 187, and into identity of holders of those documents without relevance being demonstrated, or whether in so doing it commits error of law on face of record - Whether court of appeal can limit Superior Court’s scope of review and right to apply for certiorari against interlocutory decisions concerning disclosure of evidence to cases of excess of jurisdiction or [TRANSLATION] “definitive violation of fundamental right”, thereby excluding error of law on face of record.

Summary

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Justine Awashish was charged with operating a vehicle with a blood alcohol level over the legal limit. Ms. Awashish filed a motion for disclosure accompanied by a McNeil motion. Her purpose in doing so was to obtain an order requiring the Crown to tell her whether the information whose disclosure she was requesting existed and, if so, to tell her the identity of the persons holding that information. The Court of Québec allowed Ms. Awashish’s application. The Crown filed a motion for certiorari, which was granted by the Superior Court. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.

Lower Court Rulings