r v. JOSIE LANGELIER, 2017 QCCA 606

SPCA Montérégie c. Langelier 2017 QCCA 606 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-10-005801-152 (505-36-001720-145) DATE: APRIL 10, 2017 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE PAUL VÉZINA, J.A. ROBERT M. MAINVILLE, J.A. DENIS JACQUES, J.A. (AD HOC) SPCA MONTÉRÉGIE APPELLANT – Appellant / Petitioner v. JOSIE LANGELIER Justice of the Peace RESPONDENT – Respondent and SERGENT-DÉTECTIVE ERIC GAGNÉ Régie intermunicipale de police Roussillon ÉLEVAGES S.A. INC.

IMPLEADED PARTY – Impleaded party JUDGMENT [ 1 ] These proceedings concern a judgment dated December 18, 2014 of the Superior Court (Criminal Division), District of Longueuil (the Honourable Mr. Justice Marc-André Blanchard), dismissing the appellant’s motion to be declared a “person who feels aggrieved” for the purposes of ss. 490(17) of the Criminal Code (“ Cr.C. ”).

BACKGROUND [ 2 ] Following a complaint by a representative of the appellant, a search warrant was issued to a peace officer on February 12, 2014 on the basis that there were reasonable grounds for believing that an offence under ss. 445.1(1) Cr.C . (causing unnecessary pain, suffering or injury to an animal) was being committed at or near a building located in St-Constant, Québec. The warrant also authorized the peace officer to seize two dogs for the purpose of affording evidence with respect to the commission of the offence. The warrant was executed by police officer Eric Gagné on February 13, 2014.

The officer seized the two dogs and placed them in the appellant’s custody. [ 3 ] Following a report dated February 19, 2014 prepared by officer Gagné pursuant to par. 489.1(1) (

b) Cr.C . , on February 25, 2014 Justice of the Peace Langelier ordered the return of the dogs to their owner, Élevages S.A. inc., on the ground that he was not satisfied that their detention was required for the purpose of any investigation or a preliminary inquiry, trial or other proceeding. [ 4 ] The appellant filed a notice to appeal the order of Justice of the Peace Langelier to the Superior Court pursuant to ss. 490(17) Cr.C .

On May 1st, 2014, the matter was brought before the honourable André Vincent of the Superior Court, who decided that it would be appropriate to first determine the standing of the appellant to bring the appeal. On May 22, 2014, the appellant filed a motion setting out its submissions on the standing issue. [ 5 ] A hearing was held on December 11, 2014 to adjudicate this motion. The judgment of the Superior Court followed on December 18, 2014.

The judge summarized his conclusions as follows : [79] Consequently, to summarize, since the SPCA did not have a legal interest in the moveable property at the time of the issuance of the warrant, that the public interest is best served by the Crown in criminal proceedings and that the Animal Health Protection Act does offer another remedy, the Court concludes that the SPCA cannot be declared an aggrieved person under section 490(17) Cr. C. for the purpose of appealing the order made under section 490(9) Cr.

C. by a Justice of the Peace. [ 6 ] The appellant now appeals to this Court with leave from the Chief Justice.

[ 7 ] Following a written query from the Court, the new attorney representing the appellant acknowledged that the order of Justice of the Peace Langelier was issued under par. 490(1) (

a) Cr.C . and that, consequently, no appeal laid from that order pursuant to ss. 490(17) Cr.C ., as originally pled. Counsel also proposed that the matter be dealt with on the basis of the factum and without an oral hearing, pursuant to s. 84 of the Rules of the Court of Quebec in Criminal Matters . ANALYSIS [ 8 ] In these proceedings, the appellant and the Superior Court have been acting on the erroneous assumption that the order of Justice of the Peace Langelier was made under to ss. 490(9) Cr.C . and was therefore subject to an appeal to the Superior Court pursuant to ss. 490(17) Cr.C . In fact, the order was clearly made under par. 490(1) (

a) Cr.C . and could not be appealed to the Superior Court pursuant to ss. 490(17) Cr.C. [ 9 ] In this case, following the initial seizure of the dogs, s. 489.1 Cr.C . legally compelled police officer Gagné to either return the dogs to their owner or bring the matter before a Justice of the Peace to be dealt with in accordance with subsection 490(1) . Consequently, when on February 25, 2014 Justice of the Peace Langelier ordered the return of the dogs to their lawful owner, he was acting pursuant to par. 490(1) (

a) Cr.C. The pertinent provisions of the Criminal Code are reproduced in a

schedule to these reasons. [ 10 ] The appeal contemplated by ss. 490(17) is from an order made under ss. 490(8), (9), (9.1) or

(11) C.Cr ., not an order under par. 490(1)( a ). The orders which are subject to a ss. 490(17) appeal were reviewed in R. v. Raponi [1] and include orders made where (

a) the person from whom a thing has been seized, or the owner of that thing, applies for its return after an initial detention order under par. 490(1) (

b) has been issued, or (

b) the period during which the thing may be detained following an order under par. 490(1) ( b ) - or an extension of that detention period obtained under ss. 490(2) or (3) - has expired. [ 11 ] Though an appeal lies against an order issued under to subsection 490(9) Cr.C . returning the thing seized, that subsection has no application in this case. Indeed, an order under ss. 490(9) is only available if a prior order of detention was issued under par. 490(1) (

b) Cr.C. or ss. 490(2) or

(3) Cr.C. , which is not the case here. [ 12 ] As a result, since ss. 490(17) Cr.C . provides no right to appeal an initial order under par. 490(1) (

a) Cr.C. returning the thing seized to its owner, the appellant could not appeal the order of Justice Langelier to the Superior Court, whether or not it was a “person who feels aggrieved” under that subsection. We need not consider here whether another recourse, such as mandamus or certiorari , was available to challenge the order.

It is sufficient to conclude that both the appellant and the Superior Court were acting on the erroneous assumption that an appeal under ss. 490(17) was available in this case. [ 13 ] As a result, the Superior Court judgment rendered on December 18, 2014 is a nullity and this Court has no jurisdiction to either confirm or set aside that judgment. [2] Consequently, the question of whether the appellant is a “person who feels aggrieved” under the meaning of ss. 490(17) Cr.C . remains unanswered. [ 14 ] In light of this conclusion, it is not necessary to determine whether a decision of the Superior Court following an appeal pursuant to ss. 490(17) Cr.C . may itself be appealed to this Court with leave. [3] FOR THESE REA SONS, THE COURT : [ 15 ] DISMISSES the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

PAUL VÉZINA, J.A. ROBERT M. MAINVILLE, J.A. DENIS JACQUES, J.A. (AD HOC) Mtre Peter W. Hutchins (absent) Mtre Soudeh Alikhani (absent) HUTCHINS LÉGAL INC. For Appellant Josie Langelier (absent) Respondent Mtre Pascal Marchi (absent) BÉLANGER, SAUVÉ Sergent-détective Eric Gagné For impleaded party ÉLEVAGES S.A. INC. (absent) Impleaded party

Date the matter was taken under advisement pursuant to Rule 84 : April 5, 2017

SCHEDULE Extracts from the Criminal Code (Emphasis added) 489.1

(1) Subject to this or any other Act of Parliament, where a peace officer has seized anything under a warrant issued under this Act or under

section 487.11 or 489 or otherwise in the execution of duties under this or any other Act of Parliament, the peace officer shall , as soon as is practicable, (

a) where the peace officer is satisfied, (

i) that there is no dispute as to who is lawfully entitled to possession of the thing seized, and (ii) that the continued detention of the thing seized is not required for the purposes of any investigation or a preliminary inquiry, trial or other proceeding, return the thing seized, on being issued a receipt therefor, to the person lawfully entitled to its possession and report to the justice who issued the warrant or some other justice for the same territorial division or, if no warrant was issued, a justice having jurisdiction in respect of the matter, that he has done so; or (

b) where the peace officer is not satisfied as described in subparagraphs (a)(

i) and (ii), (

i) bring the thing seized before the justice referred to in paragraph (a), or (ii) report to the justice that he has seized the thing and is detaining it or causing it to be detained to be dealt with by the justice in accordance with subsection 490(1). 489.1

(1) Sous réserve des autres dispositions de la présente loi ou de toute autre loi fédérale, l’agent de la paix qui a saisi des biens en vertu d’un mandat décerné sous le régime de la présente loi , en vertu des articles 487.11 ou 489 ou autrement dans l’exercice des fonctions que lui confère la présente loi ou une autre loi fédérale doit , dans les plus brefs délais possible :

a) lorsqu’il est convaincu : (

i) d’une part, qu’il n’y a aucune contestation quant à la possession légitime des biens saisis, (ii) d’autre part, que la détention des biens saisis n’est pas nécessaire pour les fins d’une enquête, d’une enquête préliminaire, d’un procès ou d’autres procédures, remettre les biens saisis, et en exiger un reçu, à la personne qui a droit à la possession légitime de ceux-ci et en faire rapport au juge de paix qui a décerné le mandat ou à un autre juge de paix de la même circonscription territoriale ou, en l’absence de mandat, à un juge de paix qui a compétence dans les circonstances;

b) s’il n’est pas convaincu de l’existence des circonstances visées aux sous-alinéas a)(

i) et (ii) : (

i) soit emmener les biens saisis devant le juge de paix visé à l’alinéa a), (ii) soit faire rapport au juge de paix qu’il a saisi les biens et qu’il les détient ou veille à ce qu’ils le soient, pour qu’il en soit disposé selon que le juge de paix l’ordonne en conformité avec le paragraphe 490(1).

(1) Subject to this or any other Act of Parliament, where, pursuant to paragraph 489.1(1) (

b) or subsection 489.1(2), anything that has been seized is brought before a justice or a report in respect of anything seized is made to a justice, the justice shall , (

a) where the lawful owner or person who is lawfully entitled to possession of the thing seized is known, order it to be returned to that owner or person , unless the prosecutor, or the peace officer or other person having custody of the thing seized, satisfies the justice that the detention of the thing seized is required for the purposes of any investigation or a preliminary inquiry, trial or other proceeding; 490

(1) Sous réserve des autres dispositions de la présente loi ou de toute autre loi fédérale, lorsque, en vertu de l’ alinéa 489.1(1)

b) ou du paragraphe 489.1(2), des choses qui ont été saisies sont apportées devant un juge de paix ou lorsqu’un rapport à l’égard de choses saisies est fait à un juge de paix, celui-ci doit :

a) lorsque le propriétaire légitime ou la personne qui a droit à la possession légitime des choses saisies est connu, ordonner qu’elles lui soient remises à moins que le poursuivant, l’agent de la paix ou toute personne qui en a la garde ne le convainque que leur détention est nécessaire aux fins d’une enquête, d’une enquête préliminaire, d’un procès ou de toute autre procédure; (

b) where the prosecutor, or the peace officer or other person having custody of the thing seized, satisfies the justice that the thing seized should be detained for a reason set out in paragraph (a) , detain the thing seized or order that it be detained , taking reasonable care to ensure that it is preserved until the conclusion of any investigation or until it is required to be produced for the purposes of a preliminary inquiry, trial or other proceeding. 490

(9) Subject to this or any other Act of Parliament, if (

a) a judge referred to in subsection (7), where a judge ordered the detention of anything seized under subsection (3), or (

b) a justice, in any other case, is satisfied that the periods of detention provided for or ordered under subsections (1) to (3) in respect of anything seized have expired and proceedings have not been instituted in which the thing detained may be required or, where those periods have not expired, that the continued detention of the thing seized will not be required for any purpose mentioned in subsection (1) or (4), he shall (

c) if possession of it by the person from whom it was seized is lawful, order it to be returned to that person, or (

d) if possession of it by the person from whom it was seized is unlawful and the lawful owner or person who is lawfully entitled to its possession is known, order it to be returned to the lawful owner or to the person who is lawfully entitled to its possession, and may, if possession of it by the person from whom it was seized is unlawful, or if it was seized when it was not in the possession of any person, and the lawful owner or person who is lawfully entitled to its possession is not known, order it to be forfeited to Her Majesty, to be disposed of as the Attorney General directs, or otherwise dealt with in accordance with the law.

b) lorsque le poursuivant, l’agent de la paix ou la personne qui en a la garde convainc le juge de paix que la chose saisie devrait être détenue pour un motif énoncé à l’alinéa a) , détenir cette chose ou en ordonner la détention , en prenant raisonnablement soin d’en assurer la conservation jusqu’à la conclusion de toute enquête ou jusqu’à ce que sa production soit requise aux fins d’une enquête préliminaire, d’un procès ou de toute autre procédure. 490

(9) Sous réserve des autres dispositions de la présente loi ou de toute autre loi fédérale :

a) le juge visé au paragraphe (7), lorsqu’un juge a ordonné la détention d’une chose saisie en application du paragraphe (3);

b) le juge de paix, dans tout autre cas, qui est convaincu que les périodes de détention prévues aux paragraphes (1) à (3) ou ordonnées en application de ceux-ci sont terminées et que des procédures à l’occasion desquelles la chose détenue peut être requise n’ont pas été engagées ou, si ces périodes ne sont pas terminées, que la détention de la chose saisie ne sera pas requise pour quelque fin mentionnée au paragraphe (1) ou (4), doit :

c) en cas de légalité de la possession de cette chose par la personne entre les mains de qui elle a été saisie, ordonner qu’elle soit retournée à cette personne;

d) en cas d’illégalité de la possession de cette chose par la personne entre les mains de qui elle a été saisie, ordonner qu’elle soit retournée au propriétaire légitime ou à la personne ayant droit à la possession de cette chose, lorsqu’ils sont connus; en cas d’illégalité de la possession de cette chose par la personne entre les mains de qui elle a été saisie, ou si nul n’en avait la possession au moment de la saisie, et lorsque ne sont pas connus le propriétaire légitime ni la personne ayant droit à la possession de cette chose, le juge peut en outre ordonner qu’elle soit confisquée au profit de Sa Majesté; il en est alors disposé selon les instructions du procureur général, ou de quelque autre façon en conformité avec la loi.

(17) A person who feels aggrieved by an order made under subsection (8), (9), (9.1) or (11) may appeal from the order (

a) to the court of appeal as defined in

section 673 if the order was made by a judge of a superior court of criminal jurisdiction, in which case sections 678 to 689 apply with any modifications that the circumstances require; or (

b) to the appeal court as defined in

section 812 in any other case, in which case sections 813 to 828 apply with any modifications that the circumstances require. 490

(17) La personne qui s’estime lésée par une ordonnance rendue au

titre des paragraphes (8), (9), (9.1) ou (11) peut en appeler à la cour d’appel au sens de l’article 673, dans le cas où l’ordonnance est rendue par un juge de la cour supérieure de juridiction criminelle, et à la cour d’appel au sens de l’article 812, dans les autres cas. Les articles 678 à 689 dans le premier cas et les articles 813 à 828 dans le second s’appliquent avec les adaptations nécessaires.