This week on Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan:\xa0
The Municipality of North Cowichan\u2019s decision to refuse approval for the expansion of the Vancouver Island Motorsport Circuit is found to be unreasonable following a judicial review.\xa0
At issue was whether a racetrack is a permitted use pursuant to the zoning that is in place.\xa0
The proposed expansion of the facility was to be on land zoned in the same way as the land used for the initial track.\xa0
The municipality approved the first track but then refused permission for the expansion with no meaningful explanation for the inconsistent decision. The judge found the inconsistent decision, without explanation, to be unreasonable.\xa0
It\u2019s important that there be predictability in administrative decisions so that people can plan their affairs.\xa0
The next case discussed involved sentencing following a guilty plea to impaired and dangerous driving causing bodily harm.\xa0
The man who pleads guilty was sentenced to two and a half years in jail, pursuant to a joint submission.\xa0
A joint submission is a sentencing submission agreed to by both the Crown and Defence lawyers. It would take into account factors, including the strength of the Crown\u2019s case and the circumstances of the accused person.\xa0
The Supreme Court of Canada has directed that trial judges are required to impose the sentence agreed to by Crown and Defence unless doing so would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. This high threshold is important because if judges were routinely deviating from the terms of joint submissions, many fewer cases would resolve by way of people pleading guilty.\xa0
Finally, the Court of Appeal concludes that the designation of someone as a vexatious litigant does not apply to the commencement of criminal charges.\xa0
Someone can be designated as a vexatious litigant if they have a history of starting civil claims without merit. Such a designation requires the person to obtain prior permission from a judge before suing someone.\xa0
A designation as a vexatious litigant does not, however, stop the person from swearing private information charging someone with a criminal offence. This is because the criminal procedure that allows for this is a matter of federal jurisdiction. Provincial laws respecting the designation of someone as vexatious litigants don\u2019t have any application.\xa0
In British Columbia, however, when someone swears a private information, Crown Counsel is required to either take over the prosecution or direct a stay of proceedings to stop the case.\xa0
The charge approval standard applied by Crown Counsel in British Columbia has two parts:\xa0
1) Is there a substantial likelihood of conviction? and
2) Is the prosecution in the public interest?
Follow this link for a transcript of the episode and links to the cases discussed.\xa0
\xa0