The Evolving Test for Stays of Proceedings
Criminal Law Quarterly, Vol. 40, p. 400, 1998
22 Pages Posted: 20 Jun 2008
Abstract
Writing in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Rourke, Alan Mewett expressed concern that the inability of Canadian courts to stay proceedings might produce a situation in which "an accused person - whether guilty or not - is seen by the majority of people to be subject to unfair and abusive treatment, to methods that bring the very administration of justice itself into disrepute ...". Much water has passed under the bridge since that time and Professor Mewett's concerns may at first appear to be dated. Courts can now issue stays in the clearest of cases when continued proceedings would aggravate a Charter violation or an abuse of process and when no less drastic alternative remedy can respond to the prejudice suffered by the accused or the justice system. Nevertheless, I will argue in this article that Professor Mewett's concerns are still quite valid with respect to abuses which threaten to bring the administration of justice into disrepute, but may not prevent a fair trial.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation