In this case, a provincial court judge quashed a ticket information on the grounds that s. 79.7(2) of the Fisheries Act requires both the summons and the information portion of the ticket comply with all of the s. 79.7(2) requirements. In doing so, the provincial court judge found that there was an ambiguity in the wording of s. 79.7(2) and …
Full SummaryR v. Rideout, 2014 NLTD 27
This case involved a fish harvester who was charged with violating a licence condition that prohibited him from retaining whelk that were less than 63 mm in overall length. At trial the fish harvester gave evidence that his primary method of grading the whelk for size was by using a grading table that that was an open table with a …
Full SummaryR v. v. May, 2013 CanLII 8665 (NL PC)
This case involved a fish harvester caught with crab caught under a improperly marked buoy. The crab was seized and sold for $6,832.80. After reviewing the applicable authorities including R v. Rideout, [2005] N.S.J. nO. 9 (N.S.S.C.) (digested herein), the court concluded that since it is possible that all the elements of the offence could have been established before any …
Full SummaryR v. v. Gallant, 2013 CanLII 8718 (NL PC)
R v. v. Daley, 2013 NLPC 0112A01491
This case involved a fishing vessel operator who was also an elected representative of a crab fishermen committee. Trip limits were imposed in the conditions of the crab fishing licences at the request of fish processors. For a number of years the limits had not been enforced. Prior to the fishing season in question, the accused attended a meeting with …
Full SummaryR v. v. Steer, 2013 BCPC 163
This is a fairly lengthy decision involving a large number of counts of allegations of intentional illegal fishing. The accused was convicted of all but two of the counts primarily on the basis of texts taken from a cell phone in his possession at the time of arrest.
Full SummaryR v. v. Crane
This case involved four charges including a charge of possession of undersized lobster. The issue in this case was whether the Department of Fisheries (DFO) breached the accused’s charter rights by failing to provide the accused with an adequate photographic record of the measuring of the undersized lobster that were returned to the sea after being measured. In concluding that …
R v. Arbuckle, 2013 NSSC 2
This case involved a charge under s. 44 of the Atlantic Fisheries Regulations for possession of undersize herring that was incidental catch. S. 44 of the Atlantic Fishery Regulations provided: 44. (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (4), no person shall fish for, buy, sell or have in his possession any herring that is less than 26.5 cm in length. …
Full SummaryR v. Classic Smokehouse (2003) Inc., 2012 BCPC 232
Editor’s note: This entire decision deal with the question of whether fish seized pursuant to the Criminal Code should be detained for a period in excess of 90 days. However, it is arguable that the Criminal Code is not applicable to either the seizure of fish or for orders for continued detention. In this regards see R.v. Ulybel Enterprises Ltd., …
Full Summary