Are tensions flaring among the judiciary in the under-resourced courts of Halton region?

Ontario Court Justice David A. Harris recently presided over an appeal of a case tried by Denis Lee, a justice of the peace. While Harris ultimately upheld Lee’s ruling and dismissed the appeal, he was sharply critical of the way the JP made his decision — and some of the things he said.

“This is just the latest of a number of appeals that have come to me from the presiding justice of the peace. His track record is such that I am not prepared to give him the benefit of any doubt with respect to whether he conducted the proper analysis and simply failed to articulate this in his reasons. I do not believe that that happened here,” Harris wrote in his December ruling.

The appeal in question dealt with what is known as an “11 (b) application,” which is a motion arguing that a case should be thrown out because it has taken too long to get to trial, thereby violating the charter rights of the accused person. The case involved a man who was convicted of driving while using a cellphone.

Lee, the justice of the peace who presided over the case in Burlington in March 2016, dismissed the application. The driver appealed his conviction on that ground.

During the appeal, Harris agreed Lee was correct to dismiss the 11 (b) application, though he made clear he was required to do an analysis that Lee himself should have done.

“In assessing the reasons given by the presiding justice of the peace, I will simply state that he said a number of things that certainly did not need to be said and to my mind, should not have been said,” the judge wrote.

“Further, there was no proper analysis of the application before him. His reasons fell far short of providing any basis on which one might determine how he reached his decision. That was an error in law.”

Both Harris and Lee declined the Star’s requests for comment through an Ontario Court of Justice spokesperson.

And just what were the “number of things” that Lee said at the 2016 trial that led Harris to remark on them? That’s not clear, as Harris did not specify, but the Star obtained a transcript of the trial.

In dismissing the driver’s delay motion, Lee lamented the lack of a new courthouse for Halton region, one of the fastest growing areas in the country where the shortage of court resources has become notorious in legal circles.

“What our friend for the defence doesn’t know about this court is that I’m an anarchist,” Lee said.

“I would love nothing more than to twist the provincial tail. I mean, I said to the Minister directly: ‘What with all the courthouses you’ve built, you haven’t learned anything that it can be shorter than seven years?’ ‘No, that’s the time it takes,’ ” the JP said, referring to an earlier comment he made in court that it can take seven years for the completion of a new courthouse after the funding is assigned.

“So there is part of me that would love to accept this 11 (b) challenge and stuff it up the nose of the bureaucracy and say ‘Hey, we’re suffering here in Halton. We don’t have adequate resources and all the rest of it. You allow an expansion in Milton and that has brought thousands of new residents into our community which has caused Halton to grow and to thrive, but to bring with it all the problems that an increased population have and you’ve made no provisions for that.’

“So trust me, I would love nothing more than to accept this 11 (b) challenge. But it isn’t even on the edge. You can perhaps see the edge. But it is not anywhere meeting the criteria that one has to go through to accept an 11 (b) challenge.”

Lee ended up convicting the driver and imposing a $250 fine, the joint submission made by both sides.

There are two primary courthouses in Halton: a small court complex in Burlington, where Lee was presiding in provincial offences court, and the main courthouse in Milton, where Harris heard the appeal of Lee’s decision.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Parts of the Milton courthouse have been crumbling for years and the shortage of judges and courtrooms in the region has meant a number of cases have been tossed because of delays.

Both courthouses have long been criticized as being inadequate. And although the provincial government has announced that a new courthouse will at last be built, construction in Oakville is not expected to begin until late 2019. Lawyers who regularly toil in the courthouses are remaining cautiously optimistic.

“It’s one of those situations where a lot of people who deal with the Milton courthouse on a regular basis aren’t going to believe it until a shovel goes into the dirt,” said criminal defence lawyer Brendan Neil, who regularly practises in Halton, but who was not involved in the case dealt with by Lee and Harris.

Read more about: