Welcome to Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t! This week, lawyer Kyla Lee discusses search warrants in relation to the seizure of private communications recorded on a computer.
Acumen Law Corporation lawyer Kyla Lee gives her take on a made-in-Canada court case each week, and discusses why these cases should have been heard by Canada’s highest court: the Supreme Court of Canada.
Construction de Castel was subject to a search warrant for their computers, not to search for information stored on their computers, but to intercept ongoing communications on the computers. In process of executing that particular warrant, the police also intercepted past communications stored on the hard drives of the computers that was arguably outside the scope of the warrant.
At trial, Castel argued that the search warrant wasn’t followed and the terms permitting the police to intercept the communications only applied to perspective communications, not past. The Court of Appeal disagreed and Castel was ultimately convicted.
This issue dealt with more than just the reading of text messages on a cell phone or emails on a computer. It dealt with the intercepting and ongoing reading of those emails. The Supreme Court of Canada had the opportunity to clarify it’s application to other types of warrants in other circumstances of communication between multiple parties. By missing this opportunity, the Supreme Court of Canada has ensured that there will be future litigation in this area and that one day, a case like this one will go to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Watch the video for more.
See more: