Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Charter of Rights - Criminal law - Prosecutorial discretion - Abuse of process - Right to life, liberty and security of person - Plea resolution agreements - Repudiation of plea resolution agreements - Whether the repudiation of a plea resolution agreement constitutes tactics or conduct before the court that falls within the inherent jurisdiction of the court to control - Whether plea resolution agreements are akin to undertakings - Whether there was an abuse of process in this case - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in permitting the Crown to reverse its position on appeal - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, s. 7.

The prosecution in this case arose from a motor vehicle accident that took place in Alberta in September 2006. The appellant, Ms. Nixon, drove her motor vehicle home through a stop sign and collided with another vehicle, killing a husband and wife, and injuring their seven year old child. Ms. Nixon was charged with several Criminal Code offences, including impaired driving causing death, impaired driving causing bodily harm, and parallel charges for dangerous driving. A plea resolution was eventually reached. Ms. Nixon agreed to plead guilty to the regulatory offence of careless driving in exchange for immunity from a criminal prosecution. Before the guilty plea was entered, the office of the Attorney General for the Province of Alberta found that the plea resolution agreement was not in the best interests of the administration of justice. The agreement was thus withdrawn. In response, Ms. Nixon brought a Charter application, alleging that the Crown’s repudiation of the agreement constituted an abuse of process and breached her s. 7 Charter right not to be deprived of life, liberty and security of the person. The trial judge granted the application. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal.