← Cases

R. v. Sanghera

2015 SCC 13 [2015] 1 SCR 691 Court SCC Decision date 2015-03-23 Docket 36017 English

PartiesSavdip Sanghera Appellant·Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

Counsel (2)
Solicitor for the appellant: Colleen E. Elden, Vancouver.
Solicitor for the respondent: Attorney General of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Judges McLachlin, Beverley; Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Rothstein, Marshall; Moldaver, Michael J.; Karakatsanis, Andromache; Gascon, Clément; Côté, Suzanne

Delivered by McLachlin C.J. (Abella, Rothstein, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon and Côté JJ. concurring)

On appeal from British Columbia

Subjects Constitutional law

Contents

Reasons for Judgment — McLachlin C.J. (Abella, Rothstein, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon and Côté JJ. concurring)

The Chief Justice — This is an appeal as of right based on the dissenting view of Bennett J.A. of the British Columbia Court of Appeal that the five-month delay caused by the Crown’s preferment of a direct indictment, which was not considered by the trial judge, established an unreasonable delay in violation of s. 11(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms .
MacKenzie J.A., for the majority of the British Columbia Court of Appeal, concluded:
It is my view that if [the trial judge] erred in not attributing to the Crown responsibility for the five months’ delay arising from the direct indictment, . . . such error does not upset the overall result, as I have found that other factors weigh more heavily on the other side of the balance.

(2014 BCCA 249, 313 C.C.C. (3d) 113, at para. 148)

The majority of the Court sees no error in the conclusion of the majority of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The majority would accordingly dismiss the appeal.
Karakatsanis and Côté JJ., dissenting, would allow the appeal for the reasons of Bennett J.A.
The appeal is dismissed.

Cases cited

Statutes and regulations cited