Ontario Court of Appeal Standard of Review
This guide provides general information on the court process for appeals under the Provincial Offences Act. It does not cover all the circumstances that could arise in your case. Payment of unpaid fines: If you were fined as part of your sentence, you must pay the fine before you can file your complaint. Keep your receipt for payment of the fine, as the Court of Appeal may require proof that you have paid your fine before accepting appeal documents for filing. Appeal of verdict: An appellate judge can only allow an appeal against the verdict if the trial court made a fundamental error, disregarded a relevant factor, overemphasized a factor, or imposed a patently incorrect sentence. In general, there are two categories of “standards of review” in Canada: Civil standards usually apply to appeals from court or lower courts. However, a new conflict has arisen in Ontario jurisprudence as to which auditing standards apply to commercial arbitration awards on appeal. Decisions subject to appeal: You can appeal your conviction, the sentence you received (including a probation order) or the conviction and sentence (including a probation order). The prosecutor also has the right to appeal. If you have been acquitted in your case, the prosecutor can appeal this decision. The prosecutor can also appeal your verdict. You can also ask the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal without first paying the fine. In this case, you must submit a form entitled “Request for a complaint without payment of the fine” indicating the reasons why you cannot pay the fine.
This form can be obtained from the office of the court where your hearing took place or from the office of the Court of Appeal. If your appeal is accepted without payment of the fine, a judge may order you to have your appeal recognized. If you do not include on your appeal, the amount is due to recognition. However, the Serbian Court noted that the landscape of the standard of review had changed significantly with the Supreme Court of Canada`s decision in Vavilov. In my view, the standard of correct evaluation is reasonableness. The majority judgment in Wastech refused to address the question of whether Vavilov was applicable to arbitral awards rendered by commercial arbitrators. As a result, Sattva and Teal Cedar continue to rule. Until a Supreme Court of Canada decision overturned Sattva and Teal Cedar in this regard, the standard of reasonableness of appeals by commercial arbitrators continues to bind me. There is no objection to refusing to reopen your file. If your request to reopen is refused, you can always try to appeal your conviction and/or judgment. In the notice of appeal, you must indicate what you are disputing (e.g.
Your conviction, your conviction, or both your conviction and your sentence). You must also briefly explain any mistakes you think were made at your trial (also called “grounds of appeal”). Provincial offences appeal provisions: The Provincial Offences Act (Part VII) and Ontario Regulations 722/94 and 723/94 set out the rules for appeals, including how long you need to appeal. State criminal law and ordinances are available online at www.ontario.ca/laws. 1) New evidence: Generally, an appellate judge only considers evidence and arguments presented at trial. In very limited circumstances, an appellate judge may allow new evidence (called “new evidence”) to be presented for the first time on appeal. If you intend to ask the Court of Appeal to introduce new evidence, you must inform the Court of Appeal and the prosecutor well in advance of the hearing date (preferably in your notice of appeal). You must explain to the appeal judge what the new evidence is, what difference it will make to the outcome of your case, whether the new evidence was available at the time of your trial and, if the evidence was available, why you did not cite that evidence at trial. You should present the new evidence at the appeal hearing.
Time of appeal decision: The appeal judge may make a decision on the day of the appeal hearing. Alternatively, the appeal judge may want more time to rule on the appeal. In this case, the appeal judge will schedule another hearing to announce his or her oral appeal decision, or the court will send you and the prosecutor the judge`s appeal decision in writing. New procedure: If the appeal judge orders a new trial, your case will be sent back to the court where your trial originally took place. You will receive a notice from the court informing you when you have to appear in court again. The legislator has provided for a statutory right of appeal. The standards of review of appeal are considered a matter of legal interpretation. As the Court stated in Vavilov, “a legislative decision to grant a statutory right of appeal signals the intention to assign a docket to review tribunals.” The Vavilov case involved an application for judicial review (not a statutory appeal) of a decision by the Register of Canadian Citizenship to revoke a person`s citizenship certificate.
The facts of the case, while notable and related to the allegations of spying against the person`s parents, are not necessary for this post. Arguments on appeal: Witnesses do not usually testify at an appeal hearing and you are not required to testify. Instead, the appeal judge listens to your pleadings and those of the prosecutor. If you are the complainant, you will present your case first. The prosecutor will then plead orally. If your appeal concerns a case heard under PART III (Summons) of the State Penal Code, you must serve your notice of appeal on the Public Prosecutor`s Office before filing it with the Registry of the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal requires you to provide proof of service to the Crown so that you can file your notice of appeal. IMPORTANT: You have 30 days from the date of the decision you are appealing against to serve your notice of appeal. You must then appeal to the prosecutor within 5 days of service.
The other two cases in the administrative law trilogy involved legal remedies against a decision of the CRTC (a statutory tribunal). Vavilov contained the Court`s discussion of the legal framework in general, and the Court then applied this right to the rest of the trilogy. You can learn more about the impact of the trilogy on administrative law in our latest Osler update. Interpreter: If you need an interpreter, immediately inform the office where your appeal is to be heard. The courthouse offers free interpretation services for hearings. The minority arguments in favour of the application of civil standards in the Wastech case are attractive – after all, Vavilov is now drawing a red line between judicial review of administrative decisions by the courts and consideration of cases where there is an explicit statutory right of appeal. There are important differences between commercial arbitration and administrative decisions. However, these differences do not affect the standard of review if we argued in Conduct of an Appeal that the application of the standards of administrative review to administrative complaints weakens these statutory remedies. With the majority decision in Vavilov, this legislation (and the resulting “right to be wrong”) is now revised and replaced by a rule that the standards of review in Housen v. Nikolaisen (the standards of review for judicial appeals) also apply to judicial complaints from administrative decision-makers. As a result, points of law are considered to determine their accuracy on appeal, without the Court of Appeal taking into account the administrative decision-maker. If the Court of Appeal finds that the decision-maker was wrong, there is no “right to be wrong.” As with appeals by judges, the “tangible and overriding error” test applies only to questions of fact and mixed facts and laws where a legal principle of correctness is not readily practicable.
The Court reiterated the minority opinion in Wastech: Notice of Appeal: The first step in beginning the appeal process is to complete and file a form called a “Notice of Appeal”. You can get the notice of appeal from the court office where your hearing took place or from the court of appeal.