Case information

None.

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.

Charter of rights — Criminal law — Right to be tried within reasonable time — Private prosecution in 2005 for forged document and obstruction of justice — Prosecution by Crown in 2008 for perjury and obstruction of justice — Whether Court of Appeal erred in law in determining starting point for computation of time under s. 11(b) of Charter — Whether Court of Appeal erred in law in analysing prejudice suffered by applicants — Whether Court of Appeal erred in law in failing to consider impact of pre charge delay on fairness of trial.

On February 2, 2001, the applicants were called to the home of Daniel Audet in the course of their work as police officers. It was the production of a document entitled [TRANSLATION] “authorization to search” that gave rise to multiple civil and criminal proceedings. The applicants said that Mr. Audet had signed the authorization in front of them, but Mr. Audet denied that the signature was his. He therefore filed a complaint against the applicants for perjury, making a false document and uttering a forged document. When the Attorney General refused to lay charges against the applicants, Mr. Audet filed a private complaint. On April 22, 2005, the Court of Québec authorized the issuance of a summons against the applicants containing charges based on ss. 368 and 139 Cr.C., namely using a forged document and obstructing justice during the events in February 2001. The Attorney General immediately filed a stay of proceedings (nolle prosequi). Mr. Audet tried to have that decision set aside in the Superior Court and the Court of Appeal. On October 9, 2008, the day scheduled for the hearing in the Court of Appeal, the Attorney General told the Court that he had charged the applicants with perjury (s. 132 Cr.C.) and obstruction of justice (s. 139 Cr.C.) based on their testimony on November 27, 2001 during Mr. Audet’s criminal trial and on September 25, 2003 during the civil action in damages instituted by Mr. Audet against the City of Québec as the employer of the two police officers. After finding that the charges laid by the prosecution were similar to the charges for which there had been a stay of proceedings, the Court of Appeal declared Mr. Audet’s appeal moot and dismissed it.

On October 1, 2010, during the prosecution by the Crown, Judge Couture of the Court of Québec dismissed the applicants’ motion for a stay of proceedings for unreasonable delay. Judge Couture recused himself from the case and Judge Côté then heard a new motion for a stay of proceedings on May 10, 2011.