2015 QCCA 1338, 2015 QCCA 1338

Jarrah c. R. 2015 QCCA 1338 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-10-005921-158 (500-01-031362-095, 500-01-079168-123, 500-01-027073-094, 500-01-027090-098, 500- 01-031463-091, 500-01-031464-099) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE : August 12, 2015 THE HONOURABLE NICHOLAS KASIRER, J.A. PETITIONER ATTORNEY FARHAD JARRAH Mtre MICHEL MARCHAND (Desrosiers Joncas Nouraie Massicotte) RESPONDENT ATTORNEY HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Mtre RICHARD AUDET (Criminal and Penal Prosecuting Attorney) DESCRIPTION : Amended motion for extension of delay ( Section 678 (2) Criminal Code and

Section 15 et 21 of the Rules of the Court of Appeal in Criminal Matters ) Motion for leave to appeal ( Section 675 (1.1) of the Criminal Code and Art. 34 of the Rules of the Court of Appeal in Criminal Matters )

Clerk : R. Osadchuck Courtroom : RC-18 HEARING 9 h 44 Beginning of the hearing.9 h 44 Exchange between the judge and the attorneys.9 h 47 Recess.9 h 54 Resumption of the hearing.9 h 55 Intervention by Mtre Audet.

The motion for extension of delay is not contested, but therespondent wishes to propose regrouping the different grounds of appeal.9 h 56 Representations by Mtre Audet.10 : 05 Representations by Mtre Marchand.10 : 07 Representations by Mtre Audet.10 : 07 Representations by Mtre Marchand.10 :10 Representations by Mtre Audet.10 :11 Representations by Mtre Audet.10 :12 Representations by Mtre Marchand.10 : 14 Judgment – see page 3. Robert OsadchuckClerk BY THE JUDGE JUDGMENT [1] Farhad Jarrah seeks an extension of the time allowed to bring leave to appeal pursuant to subs. 678

(2) Cr.C. He also seekspermission to appeal to this Court in respect of

summary conviction offences pursuant to subs. 675

(1.1) Cr.C. [2] The respondent does not contest the motion, subject to comments in respect of the serious character of certain grounds of appealand the manner in which they be treated by the Court. [3] Having due regard to the criteria relevant to subs. 678

(2) Cr.C. as identified by the judgment of this Court in R. v. Lamontagne(1994), (QC CA), 95 C.C.C. (3d) 277, I am of the view that the petitioner has satisfied his burden of demonstrating(1) that he intended to appeal the judgment while the right of appeal existed; (2) that he has arguable grounds of appeal; (3) reasonablediligence in seeking to exercise the right of appeal within the prescribed time has been demonstrated. [4] Furthermore, I am satisfied that the conditions pertaining to leave under subs. 675 (1.1) have also been satisfied, in particular (1)that the

summary conviction offences are not, at present, the subject-matter of a perfected right of appeal; (2) the

summary convictionoffences were adjudicated at the same time as the indictable offences; (3) and that an appeal of the indictable offences has been lodged. [5] More specifically, I am of the opinion that the following grounds set forth in paragraph 9 of the motion meet the requirements ofLamontagne, with due regard to the context of the application pursuant to subs. 675

(1.1) Cr.C.: 1. The duty of the judge to provide assistance to a person accused who is not represented by counsel, including questions relating to hislanguage rights, set forth in paragraphs 9.1 a) 9.1 b), 9.4

a) and 9.5 a);

2. The application of the principle in the case of Browne v. Dunn (1893) 1893 CanLII 65 (FOREP), 6 R. 67 (H.L.), set forth inparagraphs 9.1 a), 9.1

c) and 9.3 b); 3. Any appearance of bias by the judge, set forth in paragraph 9.1 d); 4. Questions relating to post-offence conduct, set forth in paragraphs 9.1 e), 9.2 a), 9.4

b) and 9.5 b); 5. Questions relating to the defence of autrefois acquit, set forth in paragraph 9.6; 6. Questions relating to the admissibility of evidence, set forth in paragraphs 9.1 f), 9.1 g), 9.1 h); 7. Questions relating to the application of the principle in the case of Kienapple (SCC), [1975] 1 R.C.S. 729, set forth inparagraph 9.2 b); 8. Questions relating to the unreasonable character of the verdict, set forth in paragraph 9.3 a). FOR THE FOREGOING REASONS, THE UNDERSIGNED: [6] GRANTS the amended motion for extension of time to bring appeal; [7] GRANTS the amended motion for leave to appeal in respect of grounds set forth above. nicholas kasirer, J.A.