Summary

Keywords

Criminal law — Offences — Elements of offence — Breach of prohibition order — Whether Court of Appeal erred in law in holding that trial judge had not been wrong to find that applicant had attended “public park” where children could reasonably be expected to be present within meaning of s. 161 of Criminal Code — Whether Court of Appeal erred in interpreting and applying s. 161(1)(a) of Criminal Code — Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C 46, s. 161(1)(a).

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.

The applicant was bound by an order under s. 161(1)(a) of the Criminal Code that prohibited him from attending a public park where persons under the age of 14 years could reasonably be expected to be present. Police officers found him in a municipal park, and he was arrested for breaching his order. The only issue was whether the park was a “public park” within the meaning of the statute.

The trial judge ruled that the park in which the police officers had found the applicant was a “public park” where persons under the age of 14 years could reasonably be expected to be present. The applicant was therefore convicted. The summary conviction appeal judge dismissed his appeal, finding that the trial judge had not made any palpable and overriding error. The Court of Appeal held that the summary conviction appeal judge had applied the wrong standard for intervention but that the trial judge had not erred in convicting the applicant.

Lower Court Rulings