Reasons for Judgment — Fish J. (McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell and Moldaver JJ. concurring)
Fish J. — It is unnecessary to decide in this case whether an omission “to do anything” can serve as a basis for conviction under s. 21(1) (b) of the Criminal Code , where the accused did not have a duty to act.
In light of the trial judge’s findings of fact, we agree with the majority of the Court of Appeal that the evidence was insufficient to establish to the required degree of certainty that the respondent had acted, or failed to act, for the purpose of aiding any person to commit the crimes mentioned in the indictment, even if that was clearly the result.
For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
Cromwell J., dissenting, would have allowed the appeal, substantially for the reasons given by Dalphond J.A., dissenting in the Court of Appeal.