R. v. Martin, 2013 NSPC 39

PROVINCIAL COURT OF NOVA SCOTIA Citation: R. v. Martin , 2013 NSPC 39 Date: 20130603 Docket: 2276770-2276795 Registry: Pictou Between: Her Majesty the Queen v. Darren Martin DECISION REGARDING SUBPOENA Judge: The Honourable Judge Del W.

Atwood, in Chambers Written decision: 3 June 2013, in Pictou, Nova Scotia Charges: 4x sub- s. 239(1) Income Tax Act (Canada) ; 22 x sub- s.237(1) Excise Tax Act (Canada) Counsel: Constantin Draghici-Vasilescu, for the Public Prosecution Service of Canada Darren Martin, on his own behalf Stephen Robertson, Nova Scotia Legal Aid, amicus curiae By the Court : Synopsis [ 1 ] Darren Martin stands charged of four violations under para. 239(1) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) , and twenty-two violations under para. 327(1) of the Excise Tax Act . Trial dates are fixed presently for 17-21 June 2013.

This is the third block of trial time to have been assigned to this matter. [ 2 ] Mr. Martin filed with the Court on 31 May 2013 an application that was brought to my attention this morning; this application seeks to have me review or revisit a decision made by MacDougall J.P.C. on 30 May 2013 not to issue subpoenas duces tecum to witnesses Mr. Martin believes hold material supposedly relevant to an application for Charter relief which is to be advanced at trial.

[3] As a judge of a statutory court, I may exercise only such authority as is conferred expressly upon the Court by statute or byclearly established common law. There exists no statutory or common-law jurisdiction for me to review or revisit the decision of another judge of this Court not to issue a subpoena: the matter has been decided. Dagenais v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp.[1] and R. v. Primeau[2] describe the channels of judicial review available to aggrieved litigants in these sorts of situations; a review does not lie to thisCourt.

Accordingly, the application is not granted and will not be the subject of litigation or argument at trial. ______________________________ J.P.C. [1] (SCC), [1994] 3 S.C.R. 835. [2] (SCC), [1995] 2 S.C.R. 60.