To support us, please follow us wherever you're listening and visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠our website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to provide feedback.

Criminal law — Procedure — Summary dismissal of application

(0:00:09) Reasons for Judgment: Karakatsanis J. (Wagner C.J. and Rowe, Martin, Jamal and O’Bonsawin JJ. concurring)
(0:00:13) I. Introduction – 1
(0:02:41) II. Background – 5
(0:02:43) A. The Surrey Six Murders – 5
(0:04:09) B. The E-Peseta Investigation and the Charges – 7
(0:07:10) C. The Trial – 14
(0:08:08) D. Applications for a Stay of Proceedings for Abuse of Process – 16
(0:12:01) E. The Crown’s Request for a Vukelich Hearing – 22
(0:13:44) F. The Vukelich Hearing Procedure – 25
(0:15:48) G. The Vukelich Hearing Decision: British Columbia Supreme Court, 2014 BCSC 2172, 321 C.R.R. (2d) 192 (Open Reasons); 2014 BCSC 2194 (Sealed Reasons) – 28
(0:20:17) H. Appeal of the Vukelich Ruling: British Columbia Court of Appeal, 2021 BCCA 34, 487 C.R.R. (2d) 48 (Tysoe, MacKenzie and Willcock JJ.A.) – 35
(0:22:13) III. Analysis – 40
(0:23:11) A. Summary Dismissal in the Criminal Law Context – 43
(0:23:15) (1) The Genesis of the Vukelich Hearing – 43
(0:25:49) (2) Underlying Values: Trial Efficiency and Trial Fairness – 46
(0:26:14) (a) Trial Efficiency – 47
(0:31:29) (b) Trial Fairness – 55
(0:35:23) (c) The Values of Trial Efficiency and Trial Fairness Support a Rigorous Threshold for Summary Dismissal in the Criminal Context – 60
(0:37:06) B. The “Manifestly Frivolous” Threshold for Summary Dismissal – 62
(0:37:57) (1) Review of the Jurisprudence – 63
(0:39:47) (2) The “Manifestly Frivolous” Threshold – 66
(0:44:47) (3) Other Standards Proposed by the Parties – 74
(0:49:28) (4) Applying the “Manifestly Frivolous” Standard – 81
(0:54:11) (5) The Burden Rests on the Party Seeking Summary Dismissal – 90
(0:55:27) (6) Minimal Record on Summary Dismissal Motions – 93
(0:59:36) C. Summary and Framework for Summary Dismissal – 99
(1:05:28) IV. Application to This Case – 108
(1:06:07) A. Failure to Assume the Truth of the Alleged Facts – 109
(1:10:20) B. Application of an Insufficiently Rigorous Threshold – 115
(1:15:35) V. Conclusion – 122