Keeping Up Is Hard to Do:
A Trial Judge’s Reading Blog


In R. v. Schuster, 2023 ONCJ 79, February 13, 2023, the accused filed an application arguing that sections 9 and 10(b) of the Charter had been infringed by the police.  The trial judge noted that “[w]hile the application contained a factual basis for the section 10(b) allegations, it was bereft of any factual foundation to support the section 9 breach allegation.  To be clear, all that was pleaded in the Form 1 was a breach of section 9. No facts at all were plead to support it” (at paragraph 8).

The trial judge summarily dismissed the section 9 application.  In doing so, Justice Wendl indicated that the” purpose of these rules is to provide the responding party and the Court with meaningful notice and alert the parties to the issues…A lack of proper notice leads to the ineffective use of Court time, to the inability of the Respondent to properly respond, for the Court to properly prepare and, ultimately, the wasting of court time, the Respondent’s time, and judicial resources.  Given the current 11(b) climate in the Ontario Court of Justice at Hamilton judicial resources cannot be wasted.  Therefore, improper pleadings run the risk, as in this case, of being summarily dismissed” (at paragraphs 10 and 11).