Hyperlawhypertext legal database R. v. Martin [1992] 1 SCR 838

← Cases

R. v. Martin

[1992] 1 SCR 838 Court SCC Decision date 1992-03-30 Docket 22336 English

PartiesJoseph Martin Appellant·Her Majesty The Queen Respondent·The Attorney General for Ontario Interveners·the Attorney General of Quebec and the Attorney General of Manitoba Interveners

Judges Lamer, Antonio; La Forest, Gérard V.; L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Sopinka, John; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; Cory, Peter deCarteret; McLachlin, Beverley; Stevenson, William; Iacobucci, Frank

Decision 8–1 Majority (8) · Lamer C.J. (1)

On appeal from Ontario

Subjects Constitutional law

Contents

Majority

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

Lamer C.J.

Lamer C.J. ‑‑ We are all of the view that this appeal fails. We agree with the Court of Appeal's conclusion that this legislation can be construed and was properly construed as being of strict liability. The existence of a restriction to s. 11(d) is governed by this Court's decision in R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc., [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154.
The section 1 analysis in Wholesale is applicable here, as there is no difference of substance between the nature of the legislation in that case and this one.
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Manning & Simone, Toronto.
Solicitor for the respondent: John C. Tait, Ottawa.
Solicitor for the intervener the Attorney General for Ontario: The Deputy Attorney General for Ontario, Toronto.
Solicitors for the intervener the Attorney General of Quebec: Monique Rousseau and Gilles Laporte, Ste‑Foy.
Solicitor for the intervener the Attorney General of Manitoba: The Department of Justice, Winnipeg.

Cases cited

Statutes and regulations cited

  • Unresolved citations
    • s. 11(d)
    • section 1