Supreme Court of Canada
Buchbinder v. R., [1983] 2 S.C.R. 159
Date: 1983-10-13
Howard Buchbinder Appellant;
and
Her Majesty The Queen Respondent;
and
Canadian Civil Liberties Association Intervener.
File No.: 16761.
1983: June 9; 1983: October 13.
Present: Laskin C.J. and Dickson, Estey, McIntyre, Chouinard, Lamer and Wilson JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO.
Criminal law—Procedure—Private prosecution—Stay of proceedings—Mandamus to compel hearing on informations—Whether Attorney General has power to stay proceedings any time after laying of information.
Dowson v. The Queen, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 144, followed.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal affirming a judgment of Montgomery J. dismissing an application for an order of mandamus. Appeal allowed.
Paul D. Copeland, for the appellant.
Howard F. Morton, for the respondent.
Ian Scott, Q.C., and Ross Wells, for the intervener.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by
LAMER J.—This case is, as regards the law, identical to that of Dowson v. The Queen, [1983] 2 S.C.R. 144. Both cases were argued jointly in the Court of Appeal for Ontario and in this Court.
For the reasons set out in the case of Dowson, supra, I would allow the appeal, order the issuance of a mandamus directing his Worship Justice of the Peace Inderpaul Chandhoke to proceed with a hearing pursuant to s. 455.3 of the Criminal Code
[Page 160]
on the four informations laid by appellant Howard Buchbinder.
Appeal allowed.
Solicitors for the appellant: Copeland, Liss, Toronto.
Solicitor for the respondent: The Attorney General for the Province of Ontario, Toronto.
Solicitors for the intervener: Cameron, Brewin & Scott, Toronto.