R. v. Paquette

R. v. Paquette
Collection
Supreme Court Judgments
Date
1979-05-23
Report
[1979] 2 SCR 168
Judges
Martland, Ronald; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Pigeon, Louis-Philippe; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; Estey, Willard Zebedee; Pratte, Yves
On appeal from
Quebec
Subjects
Criminal law
Decision Content
Supreme Court of Canada
R. v. Paquette, [1979] 2 S.C.R. 168
Date: 1979-05-23
Her Majesty The Queen Appellant;
and
André Paquette Respondent.
1979: May 23.
Present: Martland, Ritchie, Pigeon, Dickson, Beetz, Estey and Pratte JJ.
ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR QUEBEC
Criminal law—Uttering a forged document—Notary falsely attesting receipt of affidavit before him—Forged document attached to loan deed—Criminal Code, ss. 282, 324, 326.
Respondent, a practising notary, attested that a power of attorney had been sworn to before him when this was not the case. It subsequently proved that the power of attorney was a forgery, although respondent was unaware of this. Respondent was charged with fraud, uttering a forged document, drawing a document without authority and conspiring to commit fraud; he was acquitted in the Court of the Sessions of the Peace on the four counts. The Crown appealed on the second count only, the uttering of a forged document contrary to s. 326 of the Criminal Code. A majority of the Court of Appeal (Corey and Chouinard JJ.A.) upheld the acquittal, but Montgomery J.A. dissented. In his opinion, by adding a false attestation to the affidavit respondent had made the power of attorney a false document, and by attaching it to the deed of loan concluded before him, had acted with regard to the document, knowing it to be forged, as if it was authentic: he should have been convicted of the offence.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of Quebec,[1] affirming the acquittal of respondent by Rousseau J. of the Court of the Sessions of the Peace[2]. Appeal allowed.
François Doyon, for the appellant.
Philippe Gélinas, for the respondent.
The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by
MARTLAND J.—We are all in agreement with the reasons and the findings of Montgomery J.A. dissenting in the Court of Appeal. Accordingly the appeal is allowed, the judgments of the Court of Appeal and of the Court of the Sessions of the Peace are set aside. The accused is convicted on the second charge against him (uttering a forged document) and the record is returned to the Court of the Sessions of the Peace in order to impose a sentence.
Appeal allowed.
Solicitor for the appellant: François Doyon, Montreal.
Solicitor for the respondent: Philippe Gélinas, Montreal.
[1] No. 500-10-00038-767 C.A. (Montreal, Nov. 15, 1977).
[2] No. 01-9536-75 C.S.P. (Montreal, Oct. 1, 1976).