APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL DISMISSED
Norris Barens v. Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Constitutional law – Mobility rights
The applicant was convicted of driving without a licence contrary to s. 24(1) of the Motor Vehicle Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 318.
An appeal of this conviction at the Supreme Court of British Columbia was dismissed. A single judge of the Court of Appeal for British Columbia dismissed the application for leave to appeal that decision. A further appeal to the Court of Appeal to vary the order dismissing the application for leave to appeal was also dismissed.
Anita Marianne Dunkers v. Her Majesty the Queen (B.C.)
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – Criminal law – Offences
Between April 2007 and January 2010, the Applicant was a bookkeeper for a charitable organization. She issued 270 cheques to herself totalling over $200,000. The Crown alleged the cheques were fraudulent and that the Applicant had no right to the money. The latter claimed that the cheques were issued to reimburse her for purchases she made for the organization using her own money. The organization claimed that the Applicant’s position only required her to make minor incidental purchases. They further claimed that no reimbursement cheques had ever been approved and no one had ever knowingly signed a cheque to reimburse her. Directors of the organization claimed their signatures on the cheques were forgeries. The cheques were shown in the ledger, but with someone else’s name attached. By the time that the Applicant was committed to trial, the organization had closed down and its files were in storage. A director attempted to locate relevant files and they were provided to the police.
At the commencement of trial, the Applicant moved for a stay of proceedings alleging that police failed to properly investigate and failed to properly collect and preserve evidence, in particular the personal expense files that she alleged existed. The trial judge found that the documents referred to by the Applicant never existed. He acknowledged that the police investigation was less than perfect, but that the Applicant was not deprived of a fair trial. The trial judge further found that the Applicant improperly issued cheques to herself. As a result, he convicted her of fraud over $5,000. The Applicant’s appeal to the Court of Appeal was dismissed.
King Insurance Finance (Wines) Inc. v. Kristin J. Byers, Jeffrey J. Byers, Alda Byers, Ari Kulidjian, Robert Frederick Byers, John Doe and Jane Doe (Ont.)
Bankruptcy and Insolvency – Limitations
Two of the Respondents, Ari Kulijian and Robert Frederick Byers brought a motion to strike the Applicant’s Statement of Claim under the Limitations Act. The motion was granted as the claim was found to be statute barred. The Applicant filed a Notice of Appeal, but did not perfect the appeal in a timely fashion. The Registrar of the Court of Appeal sent a notice advising that the appeal would be dismissed for delay. The Applicant sought and was granted an extension of time to perfect the appeal. The Applicant then brought another motion to a single judge of the Court of Appeal for a further extension of time to perfect the appeal. The motion was dismissed. The Applicant then brought a motion to review the decision to a panel of the Court of Appeal but the motion was dismissed.