Case information

Charter of Rights and Freedoms — Remedies — Breach of right to make full answer and defence — Whether a mistrial should have been granted for late disclosure notwithstanding that the disclosure was made at trial while the defence still had opportunity to address it?

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.

Mr. Sandeson was charged with first degree murder. His defence counsel hired a private investigator. The investigator helped develop the defence strategy. Without defence counsel’s knowledge, the investigator also assisted the police officers who were investigating the murder. At trial, Crown counsel disclosed that the private investigator had helped police. The defence moved for a mistrial. The trial judge found a breach of the duty to disclose but denied a mistrial. He held that an adjournment and further cross-examination would remedy the breach. Trial continued. A jury convicted Mr. Sandeson of first degree murder. He appeal his conviction. The Court of Appeal found that the failure to disclose the conduct of the investigator and the police had precluded full answer and defence. It declared a mistrial and ordered a new trial.