Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 08 AUGUST 2017

R. v. Cody: Trial Within A Reasonable Time And Enhancing Efficiency

Gardiner Roberts LLP
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Contributor
Explore more from Gardiner Roberts LLP

In considering whether a stay of charges should be granted in the context of trial within a reasonable time, the seriousness of the offence will not override the rights in issue.

CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Kenneth Jull
Kenneth Jull
Author LinkedIn connections

The Supreme Court decision in Jordan1 was a watershed decision that changed the balancing required in considering whether a trial has occurred in a reasonable time. The Court has affirmed the importance of this case in the 2017 decision in R. v. Cody.2

In considering whether a stay of charges should be granted in the context of trial within a reasonable time, the seriousness of the offence will not override the rights in issue. The result is that very serious charges, including murder, have been stayed. This has resulted in considerable media criticism and understandably victims of serious crimes have been left feeling that the justice system has failed them.3 The Jordan and the Cody decisions require that all of the actors in the criminal justice system must engage in a risk balancing of priorities much earlier in the process.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

BLG At The SCC – What’s Coming In The Supreme Court’s Fall 2026 Sitting Schedule

The Supreme Court of Canada held its second annual ceremony marking the opening of the judicial year at its temporary home in the West Memorial Building, with Chief Justice highlighting the Court's increased caseload and architectural features. What significant constitutional and legal challenges will the Court address in its fall 2026 session, including cases on firearm regulations, Crown immunity, and vicarious liability?
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Borden Ladner Gervais LLP
Article

Ontario Court Bifurcates Class Action As Practical Approach To Onerous Discovery Demands

An Ontario court granted a motion to bifurcate liability and damages stages in a class action alleging $500 million in hidden fees, finding that extensive documentary production requests were disproportionate and not relevant to determining liability. The decision addresses proportionality concerns in class actions where defendants face onerous discovery demands spanning millions of transactions over a decade.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Bennett Jones LLP
Bennett Jones LLP
Article

The Coldcard Exploit: Why Victims May Have Two Routes To Recovery

A five-year-old firmware defect in Coldcard hardware wallets has enabled attackers to systematically drain an estimated $116 million in Bitcoin from over 5,200 victims since July 2026. This unprecedented exploit raises critical questions about manufacturer liability and creates two distinct legal pathways for recovery: blockchain tracing against the perpetrators and potential litigation against Canadian manufacturer Coinkite for product defects that undermined the fundamental security promise of devices mar
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
WeirFoulds LLP
WeirFoulds LLP
Article

Supreme Court Strikes Down Privative Clause: What Democracy Watch v Canada Means For Administrative Decision-makers

The Supreme Court of Canada has unanimously struck down a privative clause in the Conflict of Interest Act that attempted to bar judicial review of the Ethics Commissioner's decisions. The ruling establishes that the Constitution guarantees a minimum of legality review over all administrative decisions, with implications extending to labour relations, workers' compensation, and immigration legislation containing similar clauses.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Miller Thomson
Miller Thomson
Article

Plaintiffs Awarded A Total Of $800,000 In Damages For Defamation (Murdy v. Barrette)

A Canadian court awarded $800,000 in damages to a couple defamed by serious false allegations of sexual assault and criminal misconduct spread through social media. The case examines how factors like the severity of accusations, use of social media platforms, and a defendant's failure to mount a defense can dramatically escalate defamation damages beyond typical awards.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Article

Lights, Camera Infractions: A Review Of Ontario’s Automatic Enforcement System Offence Regime, The Risks To Commercial Vehicle Carriers And How Operators Can Protect Themselves

Ontario's automatic enforcement system (AES) offences, captured by red light cameras and similar technology, pose significant regulatory risks to commercial vehicle carriers. These offences carry the maximum 5 CVOR penalty points—equivalent to impaired driving or criminal negligence—yet are nearly impossible to defend or resolve through plea negotiations.
CanadaTransport
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Article

Lawyer Receives 6-Month Suspension For Misuse Of Artificial Intelligence (Law Society Of Ontario v. Lee)

The misuse of artificial intelligence by litigants and lawyers continues to be alarming. Although it is well-documented that generative artificial intelligence platforms have a tendency to produce inaccurate answers to legal questions, and, moreover, to produce output which references non-existing cases or which inaccurately portrays legal propositions in existing cases, these tools continue to be used recklessly.
CanadaCriminal Law
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Article

Honest Belief No Defence To Defamatory Tweet About MP (Maggi v. Smith)

A recent Ontario court decision examines whether sincere belief in serious allegations can protect speakers from defamation liability when making accusations about public figures on social media. The case arose from posts alleging that a lawyer and Member of Parliament intimidated voters during a political nomination contest, raising important questions about the balance between free expression and reputation protection in political discourse.
CanadaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Gardiner Roberts LLP
Gardiner Roberts LLP