The Supreme Court has just released the judgment in Miazga v. Kvello Estate, 2009 SCC 51, what would appear to be the final stop in a long and unhappy ride through both the criminal and civil legal systems in Saskatchewan. Essentially, several adults were prosecuted for, and convicted of, sexual assault against children based on what turned out to be false testimony. The adults brought suit for malicious prosecution against a number of people, including the Crown prosecutor, the appellant Miazga.
The Supreme Court overturned the judgment against Miazga, and in so doing set out what is required in an action for malicious prosecution against a public official for a criminal prosecution.
The judgment of the bench of seven was written by Charron J.
Respond: make a comment | read the 1 comment
Share:
Email
|
Save as PDF | Print
|
Bookmark & Share
|
|
More: in Substantive Law | from Simon Fodden
|
the count:
8226 posts | 11407 comments
recent comments  
There is good leagal content that doesn’t necessarily come in the neat packages that we usually look in. Though our commercial legal database subscriptions have linked, vetted, edited, and easily. […] »»Research When you need to collaborate on a document displayed on your screen, it’s great to have a colleague from down the hall come into your office and look over your … »»Technology You should assess whether you can accept the financial risks associated with taking the matter, just as clients will assess whether they can (and will) pay your fee. Spend time at the beginning of the. […] »»Practice
-
Available online today are four new chapters of the publication Women in Canada: A Gender-based Statistical Report, which explores the socio-demographic and economic circumstances of Canadian women in general.
-
The bill amends the Constitution Act, 1867 by readjusting the number of members and the representation of the provinces in the House of Commons.
-
-
Blueseed plans to buy a ship and turn it into a floating incubator anchored in international waters off the coast of California.
-
Under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the flow of information out of Ottawa has slowed to a trickle.
-
-
"…the IPC has exclusive jurisdiction to decide whether a record is in the custody or control of a university in the context of an access request…"
-
-
John J.L. Hunter, Q.C. of Vancouver has been elected President for 2011-2012
-
Detailed results from 321 members.
These summaries of selected recent cases are provided each week to Slaw by Maritime Law Book.
More information.
-
Banks and Banking - Liability of banks to third parties - Negligence - General
The plaintiffs were the former shareholders of a company that failed. They sued the defendant bank alleging that it breached its contract with the company and the plaintiffs and breached a duty ...
-
Actions - Cause of action - General principles - New or extended cause of action - Opening of floodgates
The plaintiff and defendant worked at different branches of the same bank. The defendant’s common-law husband was the plaintiff’s ex-husband. Over a four year period, the defendant ...
-
Aliens - Definitions and general principles - Immigration consultants
The Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) had been designated as the sole regulatory body of immigration consultants in Canada from 2004 until June 2011. On June 30, 2011, Bill C-35 came into force, which significantly amended ...
-
Criminal Law - Sexual offences, public morals and disorderly conduct - Public morals - Obscenity - Possession of child pornography
The accused was convicted of making child pornography available and two counts of possession of child pornography (see [2010] Sask.R. Uned. 197). Subsequently, he was sentenced ...
-
Criminal Law - Procedure - Charge or directions - Jury or judge alone - Directions regarding pleas or evidence of witnesses, co-accused and accomplices
Rowe was convicted by a jury of five offences. He appealed.
The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed ...
-
Narcotic Control - Offences - Possession - General
The accused wished to access marijuana for medicinal purposes but did not have an authorization to possess marijuana issued under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations. He was notified that a package of marihuana addressed to him had been ...
-
Narcotic Control - General - Legislation - Exemptions - Medicinal marijuana
McCrady, who had an application pending under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations (MMAR) to possess and grow marijuana, was convicted of possession of marijuana (Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA), s. 4(1)). Hearn pleaded guilty ...
-
Criminal Law - Sentence - Trafficking in hashish or marijuana (incl. possession for purposes of trafficking)
The accused pleaded guilty to one count of possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking. He was sentenced to 30 days’ imprisonment to be served intermittently and 11 months’ ...
-
Municipal Law - Powers of municipalities - Particular powers - Imposition and collection of taxes or fees
Catalyst Paper Corp. operated a paper mill in the District of North Cowichan. Catalyst objected to the tax rate that it paid compared to residential ratepayers. In 2009, the ...
This is a listing of a few upcoming events in Canada of interest to lawyers, law students, legal librarians, and others involved in the practice of law.
Clicking on any event in the list below will give you access to more information and to links allowing you to see the full entry and to add the event to your own calendar.
Click this link for a fuller version of the TalkLaw/ParLoi calendar of events and for instructions as to how to add events and calendars to your own calendar.
|
this was a bizarre case for a number of reasons, but the original judgment against Mr Miazga should never have been given. How can it have been a malicious prosecution (one in which he did not believe in a reasonable prospect of conviction) when the accused were convicted at trial and the convictions were upheld on appeal? The SCC overturned the verdict, and the complainants later recanted – but is it the Crown's duty to detect a false complaint every time, when two levels of court fell for it?
At least the SCC has set things right. Malice means malice, not negligence or even gross negligence, or inexperience.
The Crown does not have to have a sincere belief in guilt in order to launch or continue a prosecution, just a belief that the evidence suggests a reasonable probability of conviction. The court or the jury decides, not the Crown.
This probably will not dry up the large number of such suits (it seems that everybody who get acquitted, and even some others, brings an action these days), but it may allow them to be disposed of more quickly.
Interesting that the US Supreme Court is now considering the limits of malicious prosecution too, in a quite frightful case where the prosecutors knew the accused was innocent but got a conviction anyway. The US has no Nelles test, and immunity is just about absolute. Will the current composition of that Court want to change it?