Unreasonable Delay And Jordan's Presumptive Ceilings – Different Approach From The SCC On Verdict Deliberation Time

Canadian securities regulators have jurisdiction to lay charges under provincial securities legislation, and have prosecuted serious securities offences criminally. The persons so charged have a right to be tried within a reasonable time. Questions have arisen as to whether or not a court's deliberation time was to be factored in the timelines identified in the now seminal case R. v. Jordan, 2016 SCC 27 ("Jordan"). Despite the fact that the R. v. K.G.K., 2020 SCC 7 ("KGK") case is a criminal case, the teachings of the Supreme Court of Canada described below are transposable to a securities litigation setting.

In its March 20, 2020 judgment in KGK, the Supreme Court of Canada offered additional guidance as to the application of presumptive ceilings established in Jordan. Notably, the Court ruled on the scope of the Jordan ruling with respect to verdict deliberation time. The key question was whether a court's deliberation time was to be factored in the timelines identified in the Jordan case, and whether such delays impacted section 11(b) Charter right with respect to a person's right to be tried within a reasonable time.

In this case, the accused was charged in April 2013 and his trial concluded in January 2016, after which the trial judge took the case under advisement. In July 2016, the Supreme Court rendered its decision in Jordan in which it established presumptive ceilings - 18 months for cases tried in provincial courts and 30 months for cases tried in superior courts (or cases tried in provincial courts after a preliminary inquiry) - above which the delay is presumed to be unreasonable. On October 24, 2016, one day prior to the trial judge's decision on the verdict, the accused filed for a stay of proceedings based on the delay between the laying of the charges and the date of the verdict.

The accused's motion for a stay of proceedings was dismissed in the first instance, the motion judge concluding that verdict deliberation time should not be considered under the presumptive ceilings established in Jordan. A majority of the Court of Appeal of Manitoba dismissed the accused's appeal.

The Supreme Court also dismissed the accused's appeal. The Court first confirmed that the scope of the s. 11(b) right to be tried within a reasonable time does extend up to the time of sentencing and thus includes deliberation time required to reach a verdict. However, regarding the presumptive ceilings established in Jordan, the Court held that these...