[Home -- Accueil]
[Main Page -- Criminal Law / Page principale -- droit pénal]

updated and corrections / mise à jour et corrections: 3 March 2010 

- To assist researchers, please do not hesitate to suggest titles to these bibliographies.  Thank you.
- Pour le bénéfice de tous, n'hésitez pas à suggérer des ajouts aux bibliographies.  Merci.
flareau@rogers.com
 

by / par ©François Lareau, 2005, Ottawa, Canada
First posted on the Internet on: 13 July 2005

Selected Bibliography on Conspiracy
in Canadian Criminal Law
-------------------------
Bibliographie choisie sur le complot
en droit pénal canadien

Contents
A - Criminal Code / Code criminel
B - Competition Act / Loi sur la concurrence
C - National Defence Act / Loi sur la défense nationale
D - Other Federal Statutes and Regulations / Autres lois fédérales et règlements
E - Provincial Law / Droit provincial

-------------
See also/Voir aussi:

Comparative Law/Droit comparé
• Auteurs/Authors: A-K
• Auteurs/Authors: L-Z

-------------
- To assist researchers, please do not hesitate to suggest additions to these bibliographies.  Thank you.
- Pour le bénifice de tous, n'hésitez pas à suggérer des ajouts aux bibliographies.  Merci.
flareau@rogers.com
-------------

I- Canadian Law / Droit canadien
 

A- Criminal Code / Code criminel

ALLFORD, Jack, "Criminal Law - Husband and Wife - Conspiracy.  Comment on Kowbel v. R. (1954) 2 S.C.R. 498", (1955-61) 1 Alberta Law Review 64-67;
 

ARCHIBALD, Bruce  P., "The Canadian Hearsay Revolution: Is Half a Loaf Better Than No Loaf at All?” (1999-2000), 25 Queen’s Law Journal 1-64;
 

BIRD, Heather, 1958-, Conspiracy to Murder: the Trial of Helmuth Buxbaum, Toronto: Key Porter, 1986, 310 p., ISBN: 0919493904; copy at Carleton University, HV6535.C33S833; title noted in my research but book not consulted yet (2 July 2006);
 

BLOOS, Marvin R. amd Michael C. Plaxton, "A Co-Conspirators' Exception to the Standing Rule?  Keeping Out Hearsay in Gang Trials", (2003) 47(3) The Criminal Law Quarterly 286-301;
 

BOILARD, Jean-Guy, 1937-, Guide to Criminal Evidence, Cowansville, Quebec : Éditions Yvon Blais, 1991- (loose-leaf with updates), 2 volumes, see vol. 2,  chapter 7, "Conspiracy",  pp. 7-1 to 7-9 and 7-51 to 7-60 (verification of 13 June 2005), ISBN: 2890737861;
 

___________Manuel de preuve pénale, Cowansville: Éditions Yvon Blais, 1991- (feuilles mobiles avec mise à jour), 2 volumes, voir le vol. 2, chapitre 7, "Conspiration: Nature, règles de preuve, application", pp. 7-1 à 7-9 et 7-51 à 7-62 (vérification du 13 juin 2005), ISBN: 2890737853;
 

BOWIE, Douglas, "The Relationship between Conspiracy and the Substantive Offence", (1970) 1(4) Queen's Intramural Law Journal Faculty of Law Queen's University 3-32; the exact title for that periodical, for that peculiar number is Intramural Law Journal, Faculty of Law Queen's University; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals,   FTX Periodicals   KE 3904 .A13 I576;
 

BRAITHWAITE, W.J., "Development in Criminal Law and Procedure: The 1974-75 Term", (1980) 1 Supreme Court Law Review 185-248, and see 221-229;
 

BROWN-JOHN, C. Lloyd, "Conspiracy and Extradition", (1981-82) 24 The Criminal Law Quarterly 480-488;
 

BURNS, Peter. "Civil Conspiracy: An Unwieldy Vessel Rides a Judicial Tempest" (1982), 16 University of British Columbia Law Review 229-255; copy at the University of Ottawa, KEB 4 .U54  Location: FTX Periodicals;
 

CANADA, Department of Justice Canada, Reforming the General Part of the Criminal Code: A Consultation Paper, [Ottawa]; [Department of Justice Canada], [November 1994], v, 35 p.; available at my Digital Library, at http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; also published in French/aussi publié en français: Ministère de la Justice Canada, Projet de réforme de la Partie générale du Code criminel, [Ottawa], [Ministère de la Justice Canada], [Novembre 1994], v, 39 p.; disponible à ma bibliothèque digitale à http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html;

...

For a variety of reasons, this paper does not discuss a number of other General Part issues.  These include: ...people who counsel others others to commit offences or conspire with others to commit offences, impossibility .....
...
Finally, some General Part sections could be changed to simply modernize the language without changing their meaning.

Even though these issues are not discussed in this paper, your views on any of them are welcome." (p. 35)

----------------------------

"Quelles questions le présent document de consultation n'aborde-t-il pas?

[...]

Pour diverses raisons, le présent document ne traite pas des questions suivantes concernant la Partie générale: [...] le fait de conseiller à une personne de commettre une infraction ou de comploter avec une autre personne de commettre une infraction, la notion d'impossibilité [...].

 [...]

De même certaines dispositions de la Partie générale pourraient être modifiées simplement pour en moderniser le libellé, sans toutefois en changer le sens.

Même si ces questions ne sont pas examinées dans le document de consultation, vos commentaires sont les bienvenus." (p. 39)

CANADA, Department of Justice Canada and James W. O'Reilly, Toward a New General Part of the Criminal Code of Canada - Details on Reform Options -, [Ottawa]: [Department of Justice Canada], [December 1994], ii, 50p., see "Inchoate Offences" at pp. 28-29; available at my Digital Library, at http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; also published in French/aussi publié en français: Ministère de la Justice Canada et James W. O'Reilly, Pour une nouvelle codification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Canada - Options de réforme -, [Ottawa]:[Ministère de la Justice Canada], [décembre 1994], ii, 51 p., voir les "Infractions inchoatives" aux pp. 28-30; disponible à ma bibliothèque digitale à http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html;

"[p. 29] Discusssion and Options

The White paper sets out rules of liability for attempts, counselling offences not committed, and conspiracy.  Section 24 codifies the existing case law on attempts.  ....

The White Paper also codifies the current law on conspiracy, except that it abolishes the rule that spouses cannot conspire (s. 24.2).  The rule in s. 24.2(1)(b) is intended to make clear that two people could be convicted of conspiracy if they agreed, for example, to hire a third person to actually commit the offence.  This situation is not caught by s. 24.2(1)(a) since it speaks of an intention to 'commit' the offence.  However, it is possible to interpret s. 24.2(1)(b) in its current form as including in the definition of conspiracy agreements to do something lawful that involve some unlawful conduct on the part of some third party. This may be an overly broad definition of conspiracy.  It may be possible to incorporate the intention of this provision in more limited terms by amending s. 24.291)(a) of the White Paper to refer to 'a common intention that the offence shall be committed.'²⁸  Alternatively, paragraphs 24.2(1)(b) [sic, i.e 24.2(1)(a)] and 24.2(1)(b) could be combined and drafted so as to make clear that the conspirators must actually agree to be parties to some offence (i.e. to commit, aid, encourage or counsel commission of it) before they woul be considered to fall within the definition of criminal conspiracy.

The scope of section 24.3 (impossibility) is best seen in examples.  There will be an attempted theft where the article sought to be stolen is not in the place where the person believes it to be (attempt impossible in fact).  There will also be an attempted theft where, for a reason unknown to the person, the article already belongs to him or her (attempt impossible in law).  Under the existing law, this would not amount to an offence.  However, it is clear under s. 24.3 (and under the current law) that there could never be an attempt to engage in conduct that is not unlawful.  For example, it would not be an offence to attempt to commit adultery, as adultery is not an offence known to the law.

Options in Relation to Conspiracy

Option 1: Paragraphs 24.2(1)(a) and (b) of the White Paper could be combined to make clear that a conspiracy exists where a person agrees with one more persons to carry out a common intention either to commit an offence or that the offence be committed.

------
    ²⁸ See The Law Commission, A Criminal Code for England and Wales, Vol. 1, Report and Draft Criminal Code Bill (1989), s. 48, p. 63
 

[p. 30] Option 2:  Paragraphs 24.2(1)(a) and (b) of the White paper could be combined and drafted so as to make clear that a conspiracy exists where a person agrees with one or more persons to carry out a common intention to be parties²⁹ to the offence.

 -----
    ²⁹ Under s. 21 of the White Paper, a person is a party to an offence if the person commits it, aids or encourages commission of it, or counsels another person to be a party to it, and that person subsequently becomes a party to it."

CANADA, House of Commons, Sub-Committee on the Recodification of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Sollicitor General, Report of the Sub-Committee on the Recodification of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Sollicitor General: First Principles: Recodifying the General Part of the Criminal Code of Canada, in Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Sub-Committee on the recodification of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General, [Ottawa]: Queen's Printer for Canada, 1993,  issue no. 11 of 10 December 1992 and  2, 4, and 16 February 1993, see  pp. 65-66; also published in French/aussi publié en français: Canada, Chambre des Communes,  Sous-comité sur la Recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteur général, Principes de base: recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Canada.  Rapport du Sous-comité sur la recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Canada du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteur général dans Procès-verbaux et témoignages du Sous-comité sur la Recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteur général,  [Ottawa]: I'Imprimeur de la Reine pour le Canada, 1993,  fasicule 11 du 10 décembre 1992 et 2,4,16 février 1993, voir les pp. 69-70;

[ p. 65] "Conspiracy

    The Law Reform Commission proposed a simple rule that an agreement to commit a crime is itself a crime.  The Commission also proposed that conspiracies, like attempts, be punishable be half the penalty for the full offence.¹⁶⁶ As with attempt, the Sub-Committee would not specify the punishment for conspiracies in the General Part of the Criminal Code.
------
...
¹⁶⁶Report 31, Recommendation 4(5), at 46.
 
 

[ p. 66]  The CBA [Canadian Bar Association] Task Force proposed enactment of a detailed codification of the definition of conspiracy.¹⁶⁷  Its definition would make clear that spouses can be convicted of conspiring with one another.  Under existing law, as set out in the case of Kowbel v. The Queen,¹⁶⁸ a husband and a wife are not capable of entering into a conspiracy because spouses 'form but one person, and are presumed to have but one will'.¹⁶⁹The Sub-Committee agrees that the common law rule that  spouses cannot conspire with one another should be expressly repealed.

    The CBA Task Force proposed that liability be limited to conspiracies to commit indictable offences.  It would also create a defence for those who abandon the conspiracy.  Finally, the Task Force suggested that conspiracies be punishable even where it was impossible to commit the offence.

    On these latter issues, the Sub-Committee prefers the approach of the Law Reform Commission. The Sub-Committee would hesitate to limit conspiracies to indictable offences.  It believes that it should be an offence to conspire to commit any offence created by an Act of Parliament.  On the question of abandonment, the Sub-Committee agrees with the Law Reform Commission that those who abandon conspiracies may do so only because of fear of detection.  This is not a sufficient basis to excuse them from liability.  The Sub-Committee does not support the creation of a defence of abandonment.  As for impossibility, the Sub-Committee takes the same view of impossible conspiracies as it does of impossible attaempts.  It is not necessary to address impossibility expressly in the General Part.

....

------
¹⁶⁷ Issue 5A: 156.
¹⁶⁸ [1954] S.C.R. 498.
¹⁶⁹ Ibid., at 499-500." (pp. 65-66)

......

[ p. 65] "Attempts

......

    However, the Sub-Committee hesitates to adopt the CBA Task Force recommendations on impossibility.  The Task Force stated that one should be convicted of an attempt notwithstanding that it was factually or legally impossible to commit it.  On the other hand, the Task Force suggested that a provision be added to the General Part making it clear that one should not be convicted of an attempt to do something that is not a crime.¹⁶⁴  The Sub-Committee prefers the views of the Law Reform Commission on this issue¹⁶⁵ and would not make reference to impossibility in the definition of attempts.  If something is not a crime, one should not be liable for attempting it.  It is unnecessary to state this in law.  On the other hand, if something is factually impossible, the person is still blameworthy for attempting it.  Again, it is not necessary for the General Part to state this expressly.

......

On the question of the punishment of attempts, the Sub-Committee would prefer to see this dealt with in the sentencing parts of the Criminal Code rather than in the General Part.

......

------
......

¹⁶⁴ Issue 5A: 155.
¹⁶⁵ Report 31, at 48-9." (p. 65)

CANADA, The Minister of Justice of Canada,  Proposals to Amend the Criminal Code (general principles), [Ottawa], [Department of Justice Canada], 28 June 1993, 17 p., see clause 24.2 on conspiracy, at pp. 8-9 and clause 24.3 on impossibility, at p. 9; available at my Digital Library, at http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; information in French (bilingual publication) /informations en français (publication bilingue): Ministre de la Justice du Canada, Proposition de modification du Code criminel (principes généraux), [Ottawa], [MInistère de la Justice Canada], 28 ¸juin 1993, 17 p., voir l'article 24.2 sur le complot, à la p. 8, et l'article 24.3, sur l'impossibilité à la p. 9; disponible à ma bibliothèque digitale à http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html;

"Conspiracy
    24.2 (1) A person conspires to commit an offence where the person agrees with one or more persons

(a) that a common intention to commit the offence be carried out; or

(b) that, in furtherance of a common intention, whether or not the common intention is to commit an offence, one or more acts to be done or omissions be made, by one of them or by any other person, that will involve the commission of the offence.

Spousal conspiracy
    (2) Spouses are capable of conspiring with each other, either with or without other persons.
 

Impossibility
    24.3  Sections 24 to 24.1 apply notwithstanding that the commission of the offence in question was impossible for reasons of fact or law, but, for greater certainty, those sections do not apply in respect of

(a) an attempt,

(b) a conspiracy, or

(c) counselling another person

to commit something that is not known to the law as an offence."

------------

"Complot
    24.2 (1) Une personne complote de commettre une infraction si elle convient avec une ou plusieurs autres personnes :

a) soit de réaliser le projet commun de commettre l'infraction;

b) soit, pour réaliser un projet commun, que ce soit ou non celui de commettre une infraction, d'accomplir un ou plusieurs faits -- actes ou omissions -- dont l'exécution comportera la perpétration de l'infraction, que ces faits soient accomplis par l'une d'elles ou par une autre personne.

Conjoints
    (2) Il peut y avoir complot entre conjoints, même avec d'autres personnes.
 

Impossibilité
    24.3  Les articles 24 à 24.2 s'appliquent même quand l'infraction n'a pu, pour des raisons de droit ou de fait, être commise.  Il est toutefois entendu qu'ils ne peuvent s'appliquer, selon le cas, à un fait qui, de par la loi, ne constitue pas une infraction."

CANADA, Officials of the Department of Justice Canada and Members of the Law Reform Commission of Canada,  Toward a New General Part for the Criminal Code of Canada: A Framework Document on the Proposed New General Part of the Criminal Code for the Consideration of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General, [Ottawa]: [Department of Justice Canada], [1990], 137 p., see "Conspiracy" at pp. 119-120; available at my Digital Library, at http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; also published in French/aussi publié en français: Fonctionnaires du Ministère de la Justice Canada et des membres de la Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, Pour une nouvelle codification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Canada : document cadre sur la nouvelle partie générale proposée du Code criminel présenté pour examen au comité permanent de la justice et du solliciteur général, [Ottawa]: [Ministère de la Justice], [1990], 144 p., voir le "Complot", aux pp. 125-127; disponible à ma bibliothèque digitale à http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html;

"CONSPIRACY

THE PRINCIPLE

Criminal liability attaches not only to commission of crimes but also to agreements to commit crimes.

THE PRESENT LAW

An accused will be criminally liable for conspiring to commit an offence if he or she agrees with one or more people to commit that offence.  While general liability for conspiracy is established under s. 465 of the Criminal Code which makes it a crime to conspire to commit murder, to prosecute another falsely, or to commit an indictable or summary offence, the definition of  'conspiring' is only found in the case law.

    The requisite elements of conspiracy are an intention to commit an offence combined with the act of agreement to commit the elements of that offence.  Actions merely coincidental with those of another in the absence of actual agreement do not amount to conspiracy.  However, an accused is still liable for conspiracy even though the other parties are not brought to trial.

CANADIAN RECOMMENDATIONS

The Law Reform Commission [of Canada] recommended that a provision be placed in the General Part that everyone is liable for conspiracy who agrees with another person to commit a crime and is subject to half the penalty for it.  Such a provision consolidates the law on conspiracy into one section.  The disadvantage of this is that the failure to carry out the agreement may result not from ethical considerations but simply from practical difficulties, so that the conspiring may not always be less reprehensible that the committing.

   The Working Group on the General Part disagreed with the LRC's proposal.  The group rejected the strict one-half maximum penalty as being too inflexible.  The Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police recommended that the provision concerning conspiracy be broadened to create potential criminal liability for conspiring to commit an offence which is not a crime.

OTHER JURISDICTIONS

The New Zealand Crimes Bill (s. 61) provides that a person conspires to commit an offence where that person agrees with any other person that an act will be done or omitted to be done, which act or omission, if it occurs, constitutes that offence.  A conspiracy continues until the agreement is carried out, or until all of the parties, or all of the parties, except one, have abandoned the intention that it be carried out..

    The English Law Commission's Draft Code (s. 48) provides that a person is guilty of conspiracy to commit an offence if he or she agrees with another or others that an act or acts shall be done which, if done, will involve the commission of the offence or offences by one or more of the parties to the agreement.  As with the New Zealand provision, the English Code provides that a conspiracy continues until the agreed act or acts is or are done, or until all or all save one of the parties to the agreement have abandoned the intention that such act or acts shall be done.

    The American Law Institute's Model Penal Code § 5.03 provides that a person is guilty of conspiracy with another person or persons to commit a crime if with the purpose of promoting or facilitating its commission he or she either agrees with such other person or persons that they of [sic] one or more of them will engage in conduct which constitutes such crime or an attempt or solicitation to commit such crime, or agrees to aid such other person or persons in the planning or commission of such crime or of an attaempt or solicitation to commit such crime.

    The Australian Draft Bill (s. 7D) provides that where a person agrees with another (including his or her spouse) that an act be done or omitted to be done and this involves committing an offense by any one or more of them if any intends that the act be done or the omission be made, the person is guilty of conspiracy to commit the offence.  A conspiracy continues until the agreed act or omission is done or made or alternatively all, or all except one of the paries to the agreement have abandoned the intention to continue with the agreement.

ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION

1. Should the General Part contain a provision that everyone is liable for the offence of conspiracy who agrees with another to commit a crime?

2. Should the penalty for conspiracy always be one-half the maximum penalty for the completed offence or should it vary with the seriousness of the offence?

3. Should the General Part contain a definition of conspiracy?" (pp. 119-120)

CANADA, Parliament, Senate, S-33, First Reading, section 58 (1st Session, 32nd Parliament) also available in French / aussi disponible en français: Projet de Loi S-33, Loi de 1982 sur la preuve, première lecture, article 58 (1^re session, 32^e législature);

"58.  La déclaration faite par une personne qui poursuit avec une autre une fin illégale commune, ou une fin légale commune par des moyens illégaux, est recevable comme preuve de sa véracité s'il est démontré qu'elle était faite dans la poursuite du but commun et s'il est démontré, par une preuve provenant d'une source autre que le témoignage de cette personne, que celle-ci poursuivait une telle fin."

CANADA, Royal Commission on the Revision of Criminal Code, Report of Royal Commission on the Revision of Criminal Code, Ottawa: Queen's Printer and Controller of Stationery, 1954, 45 p.; also published in CANADA, Senate, The Senate of Canada, Official Report of Debates 1952, Ottawa: Queen's Printer and Controller of Stationery, see the debates for 14 May 1952, at  pp. 226-268;  Research Notes:  the report also includes a Draft Bill, An Act respecting the Criminal Law, 294 p.;  the report was submitted to the Minister on 22 February 1952 and tabled in the House of Commons on 7 April 1952;available at my Digital Library, at http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; also available in French / aussi disponible en français:: CANADA, Commission royale pour la révision du Code criminel, Rapport de la Commission royale pour la révision du Code criminel, Ottawa: Imprimeur de la Reine et contrôleur de la papeterie, 1954, 47 p.; aussi publié en français dans CANADA, Sénat, Le Sénat du Canada, Compte rendu officiel des débats 1952, Ottawa: Imprimeur de la Reine et contrôleur de la papeterie, voir les débats pour le 14 mai 1952 aux pp. 241-283; disponible à ma bibliothèque digitale à http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; notes de recherche:le rapport comprend aussi un avant-projet de loi "Loi concernant le droit criminel"; le rapport fut soumis au ministre de la justice le 22 février 1952 et déposé à la Chambre des Communes, le 7 avril 1952;

"UNNECESSARY PROVISIONS

    Certain provisions are not retained because the same subject matter is dealt with in other Statutes of Canada. ...

    For the same reason we are of the opinion that the subject matter of clauses 411 and 412 (sections 498 and 498A) should be dealt with in the Combines Investigation Act.  We do not feel free to omit these provisions from the draft Bill because we are informed that a Committee has been appointed by the Minister of Justice to study combines investigation legislation." (pp. 230-231, The Senate of Canada, Official Report of Debates 1952, 14 May 1952)

CANADA/PROVINCES, Report of the Working Group on Chapter 4 of the  Law Reform Commission of Canada Report 30 "Recodifying Criminal Law",[Ottawa]; [Department of Justice Canada], January 1988, iv, 24 p.; Chapter 4 of report 30  is entitled "Involvement in Crime"; Research Note :The Working Group's report was submitted to the Federal-Provincial Coordination Committee of Senior Justice Officials.  Members of the Working Group were from: the Department of Justice Canada, and from the following provincial Attorney General departments or Ministries/Departments of  Justice: Ontario, Québec, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Alberta and  British Columbia .This report is available from the Department of Justice Canada.  It was obtained by François Lareau in 1998 under Access to Information Request number A98-00186 to the Department of Justice Canada; also available in French / aussi disponible en français: CANADA/PROVINCES, Rapport du Groupe de travail chargé de l'étude du chapitre 4 du Rapport no 30 de la Commission de réforme du droit du Canada "Pour une nouvellecodification du droit pénal" (Volume I), [Ottawa]: [Ministèrede la Justice Canada],  janvier 1988, iv, 25 p.  Notesde recherche :  Le chapitre 4 du rapport 30 a pour titre «La participation aux crimes».  Ce rapport a été soumis au Comité fédéral-provincial de coordination composé de fonctionnaires de niveau supérieur de la justice.  Les membres du groupe de travail provenaient du Ministère de la Justice Canada et des ministères des procureurs généraux /ministères provinciaux de la justice de: l'Ontario, Québec, Nouvelle-Écosse, Saskatchewan, Alberta et Columbie-Britannique.  Ce rapport est disponible au Ministère de la Justice Canada.  Il a été obtenu par François Lareau en 1998 suite à une demande d'accès à l'information numéro A-98-00186 au Ministère de la Justice Canada;

"Comments on the [LRC] proposal

a. Position and points in issue

Incomplete approach

The participants reject the LRC's proposal concerning conspiracy.  The preceding remarks concerning the superficiality of the approach to attempt apply here as well. Conspiracy has never been codified, and the common law has had to make up for the shortcoming.  We have the opportunity to accomplish this codification in reforming the Criminal Code.  However, the participants feel that the LRC has adopted an extremely simplistic approach to the problem, and that there has not been thorough study done.  The LRC proposal does not take into consideration the decision in O'Brien, for example, and does not consider all the complexities in this area.  The question that arises from actions which have numerous objectives, the question of limited involvement and the question of the rules of evidence do not appear to have been addressed.  The participants note, among other things, that the LRC has without justificationeliminated 'intent to carry out a plan' from its proposal, whereas it had considered this mental element necessary in conspiracy in its Working Paper on Secondary Liability, which was produced before the report.  The LRC's work thus appears to have been done hastily, and there is a need to consider the question of conspiracy in greater depth.

Penalty

The conclusion of the participants with respect to penalties is the same as their conclusion with respect to attempt.  They do not believe that the maximum penalty should be reduced.  One participant proposes that this question be dealt with simply as another form of involvement in a crime, by virtue of a general principle such as is proposed in the appendix to this document.

b. Recommendations

1. Reject the LRC proposal on conspiracy.

2. Undertake further study of the offence of conspiracy in order to develop a more satisfactory proposal.

3. Reject the principle of a penalty which would in all cases be half the penalty for the offence.  The participants recommend that the penalty be the same as for the main offence." (pp. 16-17)

....

"APPENDIX
DRAFT ALTERNATE PROVISION FOR INVOLVEMENT IN CRIME

1. Every one is party to a crime and subject to the penalty for it who

(a) commits or attempts to commit the crime;
(b) assists or attempts to assist another person to commit the crime;
(c) procures or attempts to procure another person to commit the crime;
(d) uses or attempts to use another person to commit the crime;
(e) counsels, advises, encourages, urges or incites another person to commit the crime;
(f) conspires with another person to commit the crime;
(g) assists or attempts to assist a party to the crime to avoid detention or to escape.

Liability as a party to a crime extends to conduct and consequences intended, known or recklessly disregarded." (p. 24, emphasis in bold added)
 

"Section 31: Conspiracy

    There are two principal objections with respect to this draft section.  Firstly, one may only conspire to commit a crime which is defined in Section 2(1) as 'an offence that is liable to be punished by imprisonment...'  Thus, it is legally impossible to conspire to commit an offence which:

    1.  Is not a 'crime'; or

    2.  Is a breach of a federal statute that does not provide for the potential incarceration of offenders; or

    3.  Is a provincial statute or municipal bylaw; or

    4. Is any other unlawful act, or lawful act to be committed by unlawful means.

It is therefore submitted that the scope of Section 31 is too narrow and that it should be broadened to include those matters which are enumerated herein.

    Finally, and with all necessary modifications, the same objection made in respect of halving the maximum penalty in Section 29 [Attempts] are incorporated here mutatis mutandis." (pp. 45-46)

.......

Section 29: Attempts

    It is submitted that it is inappropriate to legislate in favour of criminal attempts in the manner set out in the draft Section 29(1).  All too often an attempted crime is merely an intended crime that went wrong.  It is therefore submitted that it is contrary to public policy to permit a principal or furtherer to benefit by virtue of his own incapabilities.  For this reason, the explanation of the Commission for halving the maximum penalty in favour of an attempter is perceived to have been made without any real basis in fact.  Similarly, this Association cannot accept the statement that 'an attempter creates less actual harm than a successful committor' without some justification being provided." (pp. 43-44)
 

"The Task Force's recommendation

The Task Force recommends that the new Criminal Code contain a provision to the following effect:

Conspiracy

    23. (1) Every one is liable for conspiracy who agrees with another person, whether or not they are married to each other, to commit a Criminal Code offence which is indictable or which may be proceeded with by indictment.

     (2)  A person does not conspire unless he or she intends to commit an offence described in clause (1).

     (3) A person who abandons a conspiracy to commit an offence described in clause (1), before that offence is attempted or committed, is not liable for the conspiracy.

    (4) In determining whether a person abandoned a conspiracy the Court shall consider all relevant circumstances, including whether the person communicated his or her desistance to the other conspirators or to the authorities, or both.

    (5) Every one who conspires to commit an offence described in clause (1) is liable, even if it was factually or legally impossible under the circumstances to commit the offence.

    (6) Subject to diplomatic and other immunity under law, this Code applies to, and the Courts have jurisdiction over:

a. conduct engaged in outside Canada which constitutes a conspiracy to commit a crime in Canada, where the conduct took place on the high seas or in a state where the crime in question is also a crime in that state, and

b. conduct engaged in inside Canada which constitutes a conspiracy to commit a crime outside Canada if the crime in question is a crime in Canada and in the place where the crime is to be committed." (pp. 151-152)

CANADIAN LEGAL AUDIO SERIES (C.L.A.S.), Toronto: Legal Audio Services of Canada Ltd, 1976- (Audiocassette); copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada (to my knowledge Library and Archives Canada has also this collection but I do not know if it is complete);:

- Commentators: Clay Powell and J. David Watt, "Evidence problems in conspiracy trials. (a) Statements in furtherance of the conspiracy. (b) proving the conspiracy and order of Proof.  R. v. Baron & Westman, O.C.A., 16 Aug. 1976", (October 1976) C.L.A.S, side 2,  part 2, 20 minutes;

- Commentarors: Clay Powell and J. David Watt, "Can a conspiracy be committed if the agreed method is impossible?  The House of Lods says : 'No'.   R. v. Nock & Alsford, May 25, 1978, [1978] Crim. L. R. 483", (August 1978) C.L.A.S., side 1, number 1, 12 minutes;

- Commentarors: Clay Powell and J. David Watt, "Conspiracy -- mens rea -- uncommunited intention to join in an illegal act.  No act done -- whether conspiracy.  Are there any included offences in a charge of conspiracy to commit a specific illegal act.  R. v. Valente Scott 1979 Crim. L.R. 456", (July 1979) C.L.A.S., side 2, 19 minutes;

- "Can an accused be convicted of trafficking and Conspiracy to traffic in the same indictment", (1980) C.L.A.S., acssette number 3; not consulted;

- Commentarors: Clay Powell and J. David Watt,"Conspiracy -- are there any included offences R. vs Barnard [1980] Crim. L.R. 235", (September 1980) C.L.A.S., side 2, number 3. 4 minutes;

- Commentarors: Clay Powell and J. David Watt,"Conspiracy to effect an unlawful purpose -- what is an 'unlawful purpose'  Gralewicz v. The Queen, S.C.C., Oct. 7, 1980", (October 1980) C.L.A.S.,  side 2, number 2, 19 minutes;

- Commentarors: Clay Powell and J. David Watt,"The right of the Attorney General of Canada to prosecute conspiracy to violate the Narcotic Control Act  The Queen v. Aziz, S.C.C., January 27, 1981" (January 1981) C.L.A.S., side 2, number 1, 7 minutes;

- Commentarors: Clay Powell and J. David Watt,"The defence of 'honesty but careless' on a charge of conspiracy to defraud: Dishonesty to be proved in the mind and intention of the accused.  R. v. Land, White & Kaye.  C.A. (Crim. Div.) January 12, 1981", (April 1981) C.L.A.S. 1981, side 1, number 1, 16 minutes;

- "Wiretap: Relationship between section 178.16(A) and Co-conspirator exception to hearsay exception to hearsay rule where evidence inadmissible against communicant", C.L.A.S. 1981 #5; title noted in my research but cassette not examined;

- Commentarors: Clay Powell and J. David Watt, "Conspiracy: Can One co-conspirator be guilty when the otheris immune from prosecution: Living off the avails of prostitution.  R. vd. Murphy & Bieneck, Alta. C.A., May 20, 1981", (June 1981) C.L.A.S., side 2, number 2, 12 minutes;

- "R. v. Hobart et al., O.A.C. Feb 4, 1982", [Feb. 1982] C.L.A.S., side 2, part 2;  title noted in my research but cassette not examined;

- Commentarors: J. David Watt and Marc Rosenberg, "Problems of Proof and Jury Instructions in Conspiracy Cases.  The Queen v. Robert James Carter, unreported, June 23, 1982 (S.C.C.)", [1982] C.L.A.S., tape 5, side 2, number 2, 19 minutes;

- Commentaror: J. David Watt, "Co-conspiratiors exception to the hearsay rule: Her Majesty the Queen v. Steven Bramwell and Kiril Mazurek, unreported, B.C.C.A. (June 21, 1983)", [1983] C.L.A.S., tape 7, side 2, number 2, 17 minutes;

- Commentaror: J. David Watt, "Conspiracy and Its Proof by Wiretap Evidence: The efect of invalid Basket clauses: the Queen v. Daniel Gordon Paterson et al., unreported, February 5, 1985 (O.C.A.)", [1985] C.L.A.S., tape 3, side 2, number 1, 22 minutes;

CHAYKO, Gary M. (Gary M.), 1955-, The Law of Conspiracy, 22 May 1984, 98 p., research paper prepared for the Law Reform Commission of Canada; copy on microfilm at the SCC library;
 

CHERNOS, Bernard, Case and Comment, "CRIMINAL LAW  -- CONSPIRACY TO KIDNAP -- INCORRECT RULING OF TRIAL JUDGE REGARDING NECESSITY OF 'INTENTION' TO CARRY COMMON DESIGN INTO EFFECT -- ATTEMPT BY MEMBERS OFSUPREME COURT TO EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACYO", (1956) 14 University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 56-62; case of The Queen v. O'Brien, [1954] S.C.R. 673;
 

COLVIN, Eric, 1945-, Principles of Criminal Law, 2nd ed., Scarborough: Carswell, a Thomson Company, 1991, xxxvi, 399 p., see "Conspiracy", at pp. 346-354 and "General Defences to Inchoate Liability", at pp. 354-359, ISBN: 0459355619 and 0459355716 (pbk.);

[PARTIAL] TABLE OF CONTENTS

3. Conspiracy...346

(a) The Nature of Conspiratorial Liability...346
(b) Parties to a Conspiracy...349
(c) The Mental Element in Conspiring...351

4. General Defences to Inchoate Liability...354

(a) The Question of Abandonment...354
(b) The Question of Impossibility...355

COLVIN, Eric, 1945 and Sanjeev Anand, Principles of Criminal Law, 3rd ed., Toronto: Thomson/Carswell, 2007, li, 599 p., ISBN: 978 0779813247;

CÔTÉ-HARPER, Gisèle, 1942-, Pierre Rainville, 1964-, et  Jean Turgeon, 1951-, Traité de droit  pénal canadien, 4^e édition refondue et augmentée, Cowansville: Éditions Yvon Blais, 1998, lv, 1458 p., ISBN: 2894512589;
 

COX, Harold J., Criminal Evidence Handbook, 2005-2006, Aurora (Ontario): Canada Law Book, 2005, cxxxii, 565 p., see "PROOF OF CONSPIRACY", at pp. 100-109, ISSN: 1201-253X; copy at the Library of Parliament, KE 9312 C69 2005/06;

CONTENTS

PROOF OF CONSPIRACY
1. Requisites of Conspiracy...104

Agreement
Common Design
Conversation as conspiracy
Recklessness

2. Parties to the Conspiracy...106

Husband and Wife
Husband and Wife and One Other
Corporations
Co-Conspirator Acquitted
Unknown Co-conspirator
Indictment

3. Membership in Conspiracy...107

Conspirators as Idem
Simultaneous Participation
Conspirators' Relationship
Participation -- Passive acquiescence
Multiple Conspiracies

4. Proving the Conspiracy...108

Overt Acts
Cumulative effect

5. Acts and Declarations of Co-conspirators...109

(1) "Co-conspirator Rule"...109
General Rule
Procedural Requisites
Charter Review -- Standing

(2) Application of Rule...111
Substantive Offences
Co-Conspirator Not Charged
Furtherance of Conspiracy
Post-Arrest Statements
Subsequent Statements
Antecedent Acts
Subsequent Acts

(3) Doctrine of Conditional Admissibility...112
Usual Practice

(4) Charging the Jury...113
Jury Deliberations
 

    in English (published every year) /en anglais:

GREENSPAN, Edward L. and Marc Rosenberg, annotations by, Martin's Annual Criminal Code 2005, Aurora: Canada Law Book Inc., 2005, 2236 p. (with 1560 pages devoted to the Criminal Code), ISSN: 0527-7892; note: the legislation is in English only;

WATT, David and Michelle Fuerst, annotations by, The 2005 Annotated Tremeear's Criminal Code, Toronto: Carswell, A Thomson Company, 2004, 2474 p. (with 1573 p. devoted to the Criminal Code), ISBN: 0459275658 (professional ed.), 0459275674 (student ed.), and 0459275631 (police ed.), ISSN: 1184-0293; note: the legislation in English only;

COURNOYER, Guy et Gilles Ouimet, Code criminel annoté 2005, Cowansville: Éditions Yvon Blais, une société Thomson, 2004, 2515 p. (1399 sur le Code criminel), ISBN: 289457327, legislation in English and French;

DUBOIS, Alain et Philip Schneider, Code criminel et lois connexes annotés 2005, Brossard: Publications CCH Ltée, 2004, 2744 p. (1476 p. sur le  Code criminel), ISBN: 2893664466, legislation in English and French; ISSN: 1707-0740;

Criminal Code (available at http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/index.html, accessed on 11 June 2005) /
Code criminel (disponible à http://lois.justice.gc.ca/fr/C-46/index.html, visionné le 11 juin 2005)

Provisions of the Criminal Code (research done on Justice Canada -
Consolidated Statutes and Regulations of Canada - Curent to August 31, 2004)
- 2 -- Definition (b) of "Attorney General"
- 2 -- Definition (b) of "criminal organization offence"
- 2 -- Definition (d) of "terrorism offence"
- 7(2)(e) -- Offences committed on aircraft
- 7(2.1) -- Offences against fixed platforms or international maritime navigation
- 7(2.2) -- Offences against fixed platforms or navigation in the internal waters or territorial sea of another state
- 7(3.3) -- Offences involving nuclear material
- 7(3.4) -- Offences involving nuclear material
- 7(3.7) -- Jurisdiction
- 7(3.71) -- Offence against United Nations or associated personnel
- 7(3.72) -- Offence involving explosive or other lethal device
- 7(3.73) -- Offence relating to financing of terrorism
- 17 -- Compulsion by threat
- 46(2)(c) and (e) -- Treason
- 46(4) -- Overt act of conspiracy for treason
- 59(3) -- Seditious conspiracy
- 61(c) -- Punishment of seditious offences (party to a seditious conspiracy)
- 83.01(1) -- Definition of "Terrorist activity"
- 126(2) -- Attorney General of Canada may act (Disobeying a statute)
- 127(2) -- Attorney General of Canada may act (Disobeying order of court)
- 183 -- Definition of "offence" (before paragraph (a) and subparagraph (c)(i))
- 425(c) -- Offences by employers
- 462.3(1) -- Definition (b) of "designated offence"
- 462.48(1)(b) -- Definition of "designated substance offence"
- 462.48(1.1)(c) -- Disclosure of income tax information
- 465 -- Conspiracy
- 466 -- Conspiracy in restraint of trade
- 467 -- Saving
- 469(e) -- Conspiracy (Court of criminal jurisdiction)
- 478(2) -- Exception (Offence committed entirely in one province)
- 487.04 -- Definition (d) of "primary designated offence"
- 487.04 -- Definition (c) of "secondary designated offence"
- 553(b) -- Absolute jurisdiction
- 579.1(1)(a) -- Intervention by Attorney General of Canada
- 586 -- Sufficiency of count relating to fraud
- 587(1)(c) -- What may be ordered (particulars)
- Schedule to Part XX.1 -- National Defence Act, section 90 (Section 128 — conspiracy)
- Schedule to Part XX.1 -- Security of Information Act, section 109 (Section 23 — conspiracy, attempt, etc.)

The Criminal Code of Canada with Annotations and Notes by J.C. Martin, Q.C.  A Member of the Law Society of Saskatchewan and Research Counsel to the Royal Commission to Revise the Criminal Code, 1947-1952, lxxxiii, 1206 p.;
 

DAMBROT, Michael R. and Antoinette Issa, "Conspiracy", in National Criminal Law Program: Substantive Criminal Law, Winnipeg, Man. : The Federation of Law Societies of Canada, 1996, vol. 1 of 2, section 1.8, 21 p;  Notes: "University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, July 15 to 19, 1996"; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada;
 

DELISLE, R.J., "Annotation: R. v. Kelly, (1984) 41 C.R. (3d) 56  (Sask. C.A.)" (1984) 41 Criminal Reports (3d) 56-57;
 

DOHERTY, David H., "Conspiracies and attempts", in National Criminal Law Program: Substantive Criminal Law (1986: St. John's, Newfoundland), [ed.],  National Criminal Law Program, The Federation of Law Societies of Canada, St. John's: Federation of Law Societies, 1986, 2 volumes; information from  http://gate.library.ualberta.ca/ (The GATE:  NEOS Libraries' Catalogue) as seen on 11 November 2000; document not consulted;
 

___________"Recent developments in the law of conspiracy - fall 1982", [Toronto : Law Society of Upper Canada, Continuing Legal Education? 1982?], at pp. 83-116; copy at University of Alberta, Cameron Library, KF 9479 Z9 D655 1982; title noted in my research but document not consulted;

DUFRAIMONT, Lisa, R. v. Mapara: Preserving the Co-conspirators' Excception to the Hearsay Rule", (February 2006) 51(2) The Criminal law Quarterly 169-198;
 

EINHORN, Lorin, "Mens Rea Required for Genocide vs. Mens Rea Required for Conspiracy to Commit Genocide", 9 January 2004, 21 p.; available at http://www.nesl.edu/center/wcmemos/2004/Leinhorn.pdf (accessed on 20 October 2005); note: New England School of Law International War crimes Project Rwanda Genocide Prosecution; covers Canadian law;
 

EWASCHUK, Eugene G., Criminal Pleadings and Practice in Canada, 2nd ed., Aurora (Ontario): Canada Law Book, 1987-, loose-leaf, 3 vols., see vol. 2, chapter 19, "Conspiracy", ISBN: 0888041438 (vol. 2); copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF 9656 E93;
 

FAIRBURN, Michael, "Mission Impossible: Exploring the World of Impossible Attempts & Conspiracies",  in National Criminal Law Program (2004 : Halifax, N.S.), Dalhousie University, Faculty of Law, and Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Substantive criminal law : 2004 National Criminal Law Program, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, July 12 to 16, 2004 / presented by the Federation of Law Societies of Canada in conjunction with the Faculty of Law, Dalhousie University, [s.l. : s.n.], 2004, 3 v., in volume 2, Tab 13.4, 10 p.; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada KF9220 ZA2 N38 2004;
 

FERGUSON, Gerry, "Recent Developments in Canadian Criminal Law", (2000) 24(4) Criminal Law Journal 248-263, see "Impossible attempts and impossible conspiracies" at p. 254 (1 page only);
 

FERGUSON, Gerry  A. and John C. Bouck, Canadian Criminal Jury Instructions (CRIMJI), 3rd edition, 2 volumes, Vancouver (British Columbia) : Continuing Legal Education Society of British  Columbia, 1994-,  ISBN: 0865047715, see vol. 1, "Conspiracy (s. 465) -- CRIMJI 6.18", at pp. 6.18-1 to 6.18-44; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF9682 F47 1994;
 

FERGUSON, Gerry  A. and John C. Bouck, et Jean-Paul Bergeron, 1916-, Canadian criminal jury instructions, version  française / Gerry A. Ferguson, John C. Bouck; adaptée  de la version anglaise par Jean-Paul Bergeron [French version of CRIMJI : Canadian criminal jury instructions]¸ Ottawa : Institut national de la magistrature, 1992, 2 v., voir vol. 1, "Complot (art. 456)", parties 6.18, 40 p. (la dernière mise à jour remonte à Novembre 1990, du moins la copie à la Bibliothèque de la Cour suprême du Canada, KF9682 F4714 1992;
 

FINCH, J.D., Comments, "Conspiracy, Society and the Press: the Recent Experience in English Law", (1972) 50 Canadian Bar Review 522-531; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals, KE 365 .A2 C344;
 

FINE, J. David, "Conspiracies contra bonos mores", (1973) 19 McGill Law Journal 136-147; deals with English law;
 

FITZGERALD, Oonagh and Lynn Douglas, "Counselling and Conspiracy",  (1984) 16 Ottawa Law Review 331-341, and see "Conspiracy", at pp. 337-341;
 

FORTIN, Jacques et Louise Viau, Traité de droit pénal général, Montréal: Éditions Thémis, 1982, xi, 457 p.; "Table Analytique des Matières:...Chapitre VII Les infractions inchoatives: Notion...3.  Le complot...327 à 338: L'infraction de complot.  L'entente.  Les parties à l'entente.  Complot pour commettre un acte criminel.  Complot de Common law.  Preuve du complot...4 Interaction des infractions inchoatives...338 à 343";

"L'infraction de complot.  Le Code criminel traite du complot à deux points de vue qu'il importe de distinguer clairement.  D'abord, le complot est lui-même une infraction prévue par l'article 423 C. cr.  Ensuite, le complot constitue un mode de participation criminelle aux conditions prévues par l'article 21, paragraphe 2 C. cr.  Nous voyons ici le complot en tant qu'infraction." (p. 327; une note omise)

--------

"Il y a donc complot dès que l'entente est formée et la culpabilité des parties en regard du complot consiste dans une participation à l'entente et non pas dans une participation à la réalisation de son objet.  C'est d'ailleurs  là que réside la distinction fondamentale entre le complot en tant qu'infraction et le complot en tant que mode de participation criminelle.  Celle-ci, contrairement au complot, consiste dans la participation matérielle ou intellectuelle à la commission de l'infraction." (p. 330; notes omises)

------

"Comme l'incitation, le complot et la tentative sont eux-mêmes des infractions, rien ne s'oppose sur le plan logique à les combiner de manière à avoir, par exemple, une accusation de tentative de complot, d'incitation à tentative ou de complot d'incitation" (p. 338)

FRANKEL, S. David, E.E. Hinkson, and Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia, Wiretaps and conspiracy : materials prepared for Continuing Legal Education seminar held in Vancouver, B.C. on October 31, 1981 / course co-ordinator, S. David Frankel ; leaders, E.E. Hinkson ... [et al.], Vancouver : Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia, 1981, 1 v. (loose-leaf), see "Conspiracy", 15 p. and "Severance and other Matters", 12 p.; 30 cm., ISBN:  0865040370; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada; copy at the Library of Parliament;

FREEDMAN, David, "The New Law of Criminal Organizations in Canada", (2006)  85 Canadian Bar Review 171-219;
 

GILLES, Peter, "The Indictment of Criminal Conspiracy", (1978) 10 Ottawa Law Review 273-298;
 

GOLD, Alan D., " 'To Dream the Impossible Dream': A Problem in Criminal Attempts (and Conspiracy) Revisited", (1978-79) 21 The Criminal Law Quarterly 218-244;
 

GOODE, Matthew R., "Corporate conspiracy: Problems of mens rea and the parties to the Agreement", (1975-76) 2 Dalhousie Law Journal 121-156; copy at Ottawa University, KEN 7404 .D353;

"[Contents]

1. Introduction...121

2. The Subjective Element: Attribution of Mens Rea to the Company...122

(A) Development of the Identification Theory...122
(B) The identification Theory and Vicarious Liability...124
(C) Who May Engage Corporate Responsibility?  The Scope of the Theory...126
(D) The Limitation of Scope of Authority...129
(E) Conclusion...130

3. The Objective Element (1): The 'One Man Company'...130

4. The Objective Element (2): A Company and its Directors...135

(A) Conspiracy Between a Company, One Director, and an Employee...135
(B) Conspiracy Between a Company and Two of its Directors...136
(C) The Director who Acts in More Than One Capacity...138
(D) The American Approach...141

5. The Objective Element (3): Vertical Integration and 'Single Corporate Form'...143

(A) Dominion Steel and Coal And Some General Issues...143
(B) Other Canadian Anti-Combine Cases...148
(C) A Notion American Anti-Trust...149
(D) Conclusion...151

6. Conclusions...152

___________Criminal Conspiracy in Canada, Toronto: Carswell, 1975, xxix, 276 p., ISBN: 0459315404; copy at Ottawa University, FTX General, KE 9112 .A76G6 1975;

"TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface...iii
Table of Cases...xi

Chapter 1  THE CONCEPT OF A CONSPIRACY...1

A HISTORY OF THE CRIME OF CONSPIRACY...1

THE AGREEMENT...6

(1) Derivation...6
(2) Problems of Definition: What must the prosecution Establish?...7

(a) The Area to be Discussed...7
(b) The Rejection of the Contract Analogy...10
(c) Definition: The Unresolved Problem...12
(d) Negotiation or Agreement?...14
(e) Conclusions as to Actus Reus...16

(3) Mens Rea...18

(a) Introduction: Mere Uncertainty...18
(b) The Intent to Agree...19
(c) The Intent to Achieve Objective Distinguished...28
(d) The Intent to Achieve Objective Examined...29

(i) Conspiracy to Breach Absolute Prohibition...29
(ii) Advertence as to Circumstances, Consequences and Persons...33

(A) As to Circumstances...33
(B) As to Consequences...36
(C) As to Persons...37

(iii) Recklessness...38

(e) Impossibility...41
(f) Conspiracy and Other Inchoate Offences...45

Chapter 2 UNLAFUL ACT AND THE SCOPE OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY...47

THE DEFINITION OF UNLAWFUL ACT...47

(1) Introduction...47
(2) Conspiracy to Commit a Public Mischief...49

(a) Conspiracy to Defeat or Pervert the Course of Justice...53
(b) Combination against the Government...54
(c) Conspiracy to Injure...55
(d) Conspiracy to Defraud...55

(i) Conspiracyu to Dishonestly Injure the Government, or a Governmental Function...55
(ii) Conspiracy to Dishonestly Injure a Section of the Public...56
(iii) Conspiracy to Dishonestly Injure Individuals...56

(3) Conspiracy to Corrupt Public Morals...57

(a) Introduction...57
(b) The Structural Overview -- A Preliminary Question...58
(c) The Authority -- Its Relevance and Uses...59

(4) Conspiracy to Commit a Tort...62

(a) Introduction...62
(b) Are All Torts "Unlawful Acts"?...63

(i) Torts Involving Fraud...64
(ii) Torts Involving Use of Force...64
(iii) Torts Involving the Public Interest...65
(iv) Torts Involving Malice...66
(v) Torts Involving Intent to Inflict More Than Nominal Damage...66

(c) Which Torts are Sufficient to Constitute "Unlawful Acts"?
(d) The Relationship  Between Tort and Public Mischief as Unlawful Acts...69

(i) Proof of Fraud in Conspiracy to Commit a Fraudulent Tort...70
(ii) Proof of Fraud in Conspiracy to Commit a Public Mischief...73
(iii) Conclusion...73

(5) Conclusion...74

THE LAW AND "UNLAWFUL ACT"...74

(1) Certainty in the Law...74
(2) The Role of the Jury...78
(3) The Rationale of Criminal Conspiracy...82
(5) The Applicability of Common Law Conspiracy in Canada...87
 

Chapter 3  PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT...96

INTRODUCTION...96

CONSPIRACY BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE...97

(!) The State of the Law...97
(2) The Reason for the Rules...98
(3) Commentary on the Rules...99

THE RESPONSIBILITY OF A CO-CONSPIRATOR AND A REQUIREMENT OF CONSISTENCY...101

(1) The Law Until 1974

(a) The Basic Rule...101
(b) Variations on the Basic Rule...103
(c) Conclusion...106

(2) 1974: D.P.P. v. Shannon...106

CORPORATE CONSPIRACY: PROBLEMS OF MENS REA AND THE PARTIES TI THE AGRREMENT...109

(1) Introduction...109

(2) The Subjective Element: Attribution of Mens Rea to the Company...109

(a) Development of the Identification Theory...109
(b) The Identification Theory and Vicarious Liability...111
(c) Who May Engage Corporate Responsibility?  The Scope of the Theory...112
(d) The Limitation of Scope of Authority...115
(e) Conclusion...116

(3) The Objective Element (1): The 'One Man Company'...116

(4) The Objective Element (2): A Company and its Directors...120

(a) Conspiracy Between a Company, One Director, and an Employee...120
(b) Conspiracy Between a Company and Two of its Directors...121
(c) The Director who Acts in More Than One Capacity...122
(d) The American Approach...125

(5) The Objective Element (3): Vertical Integration and 'Single Corporate Form'...127

(a) Dominion Steel and Coal And Some General Issues...127
(b) Other Canadian Anti-Combine Cases...131
(c) A Notion American Anti-Trust...132
(d) Conclusion...133

(6) Conclusions...134
 

Chapter 4  JURISDICTION OVER CONSPIRACY...138

INTRODUCTION...138

THE DOMESTIC JURISDICTIONAL RULES...141

(1) Jurisdiction Over an Agreement Made Within the Territory...141

(a) The Rule in Owen...141
(b) Canadian Authority: The Possible Application of Owen in Canada...143
(c) Exceptions to the Rule in Owen...147
(d) The Result of the Rule in Owen: Where is the Crime Committed?...150

(i) Introductory Comment...150
(ii) The 'Gist of the Offence'...151
(iii) The Continuing Offence...152
(iv) Exursus: Crime by Mail...153
(v) Conclusion...154

(2) Jurisdiction Over an Agreement Made Outside the Territory...155

(a) English Authority...155
(b) Canadian Authority...156
(c) Venue and Jurisdiction Distinguished...158
(d) The Operation of the Rule: Rationales and Connecting Factors...160

(i) Introduction...160
(ii) The Territorial Rationale and the Renewal of the Offence...160
(iii) The Objective Rationale and the effect of the Offence...162

(e) Four Undecided Jurisdictional Problems: Application of the Territorial Rationale; Application of the Objective rationale...164

(3) The Relation Between Doot and Owen...167

CONCLUSIONS...168

Chapter 5  CONSPIRACY AND THE SUBSTANTIVE OFFENCE...170

INTRODUCTION...170

(1) Case A: Joinder Simpliciter...170
(2) Case B: Successive Prosecution...171
(3) Case C: Joinder of Conspiracy and Another Substantive Count or Successive Prosecutions for Conspiracy and Another Substantive Offence...171
(4) Case D: The Complex Xase...171

MEANS OF OBJECTION TO CASE (A)...172
(1) Introduction...172
(2) The Basis of the Law...173
(3) The Reasons for Objection...178

(a) Judicial Attitudes...178
(b) The Original Objection: Evidence...179
(c) The Complex Trial...182
(d) The Question of Moral Double Jeoprady...183
(e) Cumulative Punishment...184
(f) Joinder and Conspiracy Rationales...185

(4) Remedies Under Case (A)...187

(a) Judicial Disapproval...187
(b) The Possibility of Election...187
(c) Judicial Discretion Under the Code...192
(d) Grounds for Appeal...192
(e) Opportunity for Mistake...192
(f) Quashing of Both Counts...194
(g) Use of Sentencing Discretion...194

SPECIAL MEANS OF OBJECTION: HEREIN OF OTHER CASES...195
(1) Special Means of Objection to Case (B): Judicial Control over prosecution Discretion...195

(a) The Rule against Splitting the Case...195
(b) The Rule against Splitting the Case versus Election...198

(2) Special Means of Objection to Cases (B) and (C): An Autrefois Plea...200

(a) Introduction...200
(b) Conspiracy and the Substantive Offence...200
(c) Conclusion...202

(3) Special Means of Objection to Cases (A), (B) and (C): Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel and Inconsistent Verdicts...203

(a) Introduction...202
(b) Issue Estoppel and Inconsistent Verdicts...204

(i) Conviction of Conspiracy: Acquittal of Substantive Charges...204
(ii) Acquittal of Conspiracy: Conviction of Substantive Offence...206
(iii) General Principles...208

(c) Res Judicata and Kienapple...212

(4) Speacial Means of Objection to Case (D): Application for Separate Trial...214

(a) Introduction...214
(b) The General Rules...215

(i) The 'Spilling Over' of Evidence...216
(ii) Antagonistic Defenses...218
(iii) The Complex Trial...219
(iv) Factors Contra Severance...220

(c) Conclusion...221

EXCURSUS: DUPLICITY AND MULTIPLE CONSPIRACIES
(1) Duplicious Conspiracy Counts and Autrefois Pleas...221
(2) The Number of Conspiracies: Advertence to Co-Conspirators...225

CONCLUSION...228
(1) Case (A)...228
(2) Case (B)...229
(3) Case (C)...229
(4) Case (D)...229
(5) Multiple Conspiracies...230
 

Chapter 6  A NOTE ON EVIDENCE IN CONSPIRACY CASES...231

INTRODUCTION...231

INFERENCES, CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE AND THE RULE IN HODGE'S CASE...232
(1) Introduction...232
(2) Order of proof...232
(3) Proof of Adherence...234
(4) Proof of the Agreement...237

(a) The Type of Overt Act which may be Used...238
(b) Proof Otherwise than by Overt Acts...240

(5) The Totality of the Evidence and the Rule in Hodge's Case...241

THE CO-CONSPIRATOR'S EXCEPTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE...245
(1) Introduction...245
(2) Acts and Declarations...246
(3) The Requirement of 'In Futherance'...247
(4) The Requirement of Independent Proof...250
(5) Rationales for the Exception...251
(6) Conclusion...253

CONCLUSION...255

INDEX...257" (pp. v-x)

___________Recent developments in the law of criminal conspiracy, LL.M. Thesis, Dalhousie University, 1974, viii, 286 leaves;
 

GRANT, Brian, "Attempts and Complicity", in CANADA, House of Commons,Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Sub-Committee on the recodification of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General,  [Ottawa]: Queen's Printer for Canada, 1992, Issue number 2,  June 15, 1992, at pp. 2A : 66 to 2A : 72; also available in French/aussi disponible en français: CANADA, Chambre des communes, Procès-verbaux et témoignages du Sous-comité sur la Recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteur général,  [Ottawa]: I'Imprimeur de la Reine pour le Canada, 1992, fasicule numéro 2, 15 juin 1992, aux pp. 2A : 200 à 2A : 209;

"The recommendation, then, is for the following conspiracy provision:

Conspiracy.  (1) Everyone is liable for conspiracy who agrees with another person to commit a crime and is subject to half the penalty for it.

(2) It is an affirmative defence that the actor, after conspiring to commit a crime, thwarted the success of the conspiracy, under circumstances manifesting a complete and voluntary renunciation of his criminal purpose." (p. 2A : 72)

------

"Par conséquent, nous recommandons la disposition suivante en matière de complot.

Complot.  (1) Quiconque s'entend avec autrui pour commettre un crime est responsable de complot et est passible de la moitié de la peine prévue pour le crime projeté.

(2) L'auteur peut se défendre en prouvant qu'après avoir comploté pour commettre un crime, il a contrarié le succès du complot dans des circonstances qui indiquent une renonciation complète et volontaire à son dessein criminel." (p. 2A:  209)

GROBERMAN, Harvey, "The Multiple Conspiracies Problem in Canada", (1982) 40 University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 1-37;
 

HÉBERT, Jean-Claude, Droit pénal des affaires, Cowansville (Québec): Éditions Yvon Blais, 2002, xxi, 831 p., voir  "Le partenariat" (la partcipation conjurée, la conspiration, et l'interface de la complicité et du complot) aux pp. 19-42; ISBN: 289451607X (livre consulté, les 13-14 janvier 2003);
 

___________"L'infraction incluse en matière de conspiration", (1976) 36 Revue du Barreau 578-582; copie à l'Université d'Ottawa, Périodiques FTX, KEQ 160 .A2 B45;
 

___________"L'opportunité d'un procès séparé en matière de conspiration", (1976) 36 Revue du Barreau 712-714; copie à l'Université d'Ottawa, Périodiques FTX, KEQ 160 .A2 B45;
 

___________"La preuve de l'infraction substantive en  matière de complot.  L'incidence d'une preuve illégale devant jury", (1982) 42 Revue du Barreau 304-313; arrêt Lachapelle et Brunet c. La Reine, numéro 500-10-000018-802, 3 mars 1982, Cour d'appel du Québec; copie à l'Université d'Ottawa, Périodiques FTX, KEQ 160 .A2 B45;
 

HILL, Casey S., 1951-, David M. Tanovich, Louis P. Strezos, Scott C. Hutchison,  McWilliams' Canadian Criminal Evidence,  4th ed., Aurora (Ontario): Canada Law Book, 2003, 2 v. (loose-leaf), ISBN: 0888043716; note:  previous editions by Peter K. McWilliams, under the title: Canadian Criminal Evidence;

"[TABLE OF CONTENTS -- RELEVANT PART]

7:140 CO-CONSPIRATOR OR COMMON ENTERPRISE RULE...7-136

7:140.10 Scope and Rationale of the Rule...7-136

- 7:140.10.10  Agency...7-137
- 7:140.10.20 As the Actus Reus of the Offence (the 'Res Gestae Explanation')...7-39
- 7:140.10.30 Practical Concerns...7-139

7:140.20 Operation of the Rule...7-140

- 7:140.20.10 The Three-Stage Analysis...7-140
- 7:140.20.20 Stage One: Proof of the Conspiracy on Common Enterprise...7-142
- 7:140.20.30 Stage Two: Proof of the Involvement of the Particular Accused...7-143
- 7:140.20.40 Stage Three: Use of Acts and Declarations 'In Furtherance'...7-144
- 7:140.20.50 Non-Hearsay Uses of Acts and Declarations...7-147

7:140.30 Jury Direction in Case where Common Enterprise Evidence Led...7-148

7:140.40  The Rule in Operation...7-150

7:140.45 'Failsafe' Exclusion...7-150

7: 140.50 Specific Issues...7-150

- 7:140.50.10  Two-Person Conspiracies...7-150
- 7:140.50.20 Non-Hearsay Uses...7-150.1

7:140.60 The Co-Conspirator/Common Criminal Enterprise Rule after Starr...7-150.1

- 7:140.60.10 The Case Against the Rule...7-151
- 7:140.60.20  The Casein Favour of the Rule...7-152
                          Justifying the Rule Under Starr...7-152
                          Considering the Rule Outside Necessity and Reliability...7-155"

(vol. 1, pp. CONS 6-7, December 2004)

HOSKINS, Frank P., "Conspiracy",  in National Criminal Law Program (2004 : Halifax, N.S.), Dalhousie University, Faculty of Law, and Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Substantive criminal law : 2004 National Criminal Law Program, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, July 12 to 16, 2004 / presented by the Federation of Law Societies of Canada in conjunction with the Faculty of Law, Dalhousie University, [s.l. : s.n.], 2004, 3 v., in volume 1, Tab 5.3, 26 p.; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada KF9220 ZA2 N38 2004;
 

HUARD, Isabelle, "Éthymologie juridique: La doctrine", (1 avril 2002) Le Journal le Barreau p. 28;

"[L]a 'doctrine de la conspiration' (conspiracy doctrine) possède sa petite histoire histoire bien à elle.  En effet cette doctrine est en réalité une jurisprudence établie au XIX^e siècle selon laquelle les tribunaux anglais avaient décidé que les questions individuelles permises par la loi devenaient illégales s'il y avait coalition ou concertation de plusieurs personnes pour les accomplir.  C'est en vertu de cette 'doctrine' que les tribunaux ont condamné à l'origine le droit de coalition, le droit d'association et le droit de grève."

HUNT, Douglas C., "Evidentiary Rules Peculiar to Conspiracy Cases", (1973-74) 16 The Criminal Law Quarterly 307-340;
 

ILLICO COOMUNICATION INC (http://www.illico.qc.ca/), Recherches:

- CR-7090   L'abus de confiance doublé d'un complot

- CR-7091   La fraude doublée d'un complot (C.A. & R.C.S.)

- CR-7954   Le complot pour trafic de stupéfiants: problèmes de preuve

- RE-7212   Le complot et la conspiration en responsabilité civile (responsabilité civile)

KAMEL-TOUEG, Nabil, Précis de droit pénal général : droit pénal I, 2e édition, Mont-Royal (Québec) : Modulo, 1994, ix, 242 p., voir "Le conspirateur" aux pp. 148-155, ISBN: 2891135024; copie à l'Université d'Ottawa,  FTX General   KE 8809 .K35 1994;
 

KENNEDY, Rob, [Conspiracy and attempt] / submitted by 723799, 1980, 25 leaves (series; Advanced criminal law papers), copy at the  University of Calgary, Library, call number: KF210 .C246 1980 K46; title noted in my research but document not consulted;
 

LAPOINTE, Pierre, "Les infractions criminelles", dans Claude Leblond, responsable du secteur Droit pénal, École du Barreau du Québec, Droit pénal (Infractions, moyens de défense et sentence), Cowansville (Québec): Les Éditions Yvon Blais, une société Thomson, 2003, 278 p., aux pp. 55-119, voir "Le complot (art. 465 C.cr.)" aux pp. 58-62 (Collection; Collection de droit 2002-2003; volume 11), ISBN: 2894515863; copie à la Bibliothèque de la Cour suprême du Canada, KF385 ZB5 C681 v. 11  2002-03 c. 01;

Table des matières

Le complot (art. 465 C.cr.)...58

1.  Introduction...58

2.  Les éléments matériels...59

a) L'entente...59
b) Les formes particulières...59
c) Les personnes...60

1) Les époux...60
2) Les personnes morales...60

d) L'objet de l'entente...60

3. L'intention...60

4. Les règles particulières de preuve...60

a) L'exception au ouï-dire, les actes manifestes...60
b) La procédure concernant les actes manifestes...61

5. L'aspect procédural...61

a) La juridiction...61
b) L'acte d'accusation...62
c) Les verdicts...62

6.  Les peines...62

LAW REFORM COMMISSION OF CANADA / COMMISSION DE RÉFORME DU DROIT DU CANADA

___________Extraterritorial Jurisdiction, Ottawa: Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, 1984, [xiii], 210 p., see "Conspiracies", at pp. 112-118 (series; working paper; number 37), ISBN: 0662136039; note paper written by James M. Simpson; copy of the English version of this working paper is available in pdf format at my Digital Library -- Canadian Criminal Law; also published in French / aussi publié en français: La juridiction extra-territoriale, Ottawa: Ministre des Approvisionnements et Services Canada, 1984, [xiv], 222 p., voir "Le complot", aux pp. 117-123 (Collection; document de travail; numéro 37), ISBN: 0662928776; note: document écrit par James M. Simpson;

"RECOMMENDATION
    53. That the existing approach in subsection 423(3) of the Criminal code be maintained but that in addition, consideration be given by the federal Department of Justice as to whether there are any specific offences so serious that Parliament should enact that a conspiracy in Canada to commit them outside Canada would constitute a crime in Canada regardless how they may be regarded by the law of any other state." (pp. 114-115)

"RECOMMENDATION
    54.  That the Criminal Code provide that the only conspiracies outside Canada that may be prosecuted in Canada be those that satisfy both the following condistions, namely conspiracies:

(a) that have as their object the commission of an indictable offence in Canada; and

(b) pursuant to which or in furtherance of which an overt act takes place in Canada, unless the conspiracy had as its object the commission of an offence in Canada that Parliament specifies as an exception to the overt act requirement such as the unlawful importation of drugs into Canada." (p. 117)

To attain that result we recommend that subsections 423(4), (5) and (6) of the Criminal Code be deleted, and that the General Part confer juridiction on Canadian courts to try any offence against subsection 423(1) of conspiracy, committed outside Canada, if an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy has been performed in Canada, provided that an overt act not be required in respect of particular offences to be specified by Parliament." (pp. 117-118)

.....

"RECOMMANDATION
    53. Nous recommandons que la règle énoncée au paragraphe 423(3) du Code criminel soit maintenu mais que le ministère fédéral de la Justice détermine s'il y a lieu d'adopter une disposition prévoyant qu'un complot, au Canada, en vue de commettre à l'étranger certains types de crimes particulièrement graves constitue un crime de complot au Canada, quelle que soit la façon dont le crime projeté est considéré ailleurs." (p. 120)

"RECOMMANDATION
   54.  Nous recommandons qu'il soit prévu, dans le Code criminel, que les seuls complots formés à l'étranger qui sont punissables au Canada sont ceux qui remplissent les conditions suivantes:

a) le complot a pour objet la perpétration d'un acte criminel au Canada; et

b) un acte manifeste a été accompli au Canada en vue de la réalisation du complot, à moins que celui-ci n'ait pour objet la perpétration au Canada d'une infraction que le Parlement a exceptée de l'exigence de l'acte manifeste, telle l'importation illégale au Canada.

Afin d'arriver à ce résultat, nous recommandons l'abrogation des paragraphes (4), (5) et (6) de l'article 423 du Code criminel.  Nous recommandons également que la partie générale habilite les tribunaux canadiens à connaître de tout complot visé au paragraphe 423(1) et commis à l'étranger lorsqu'un acte manifeste a été fait au Canada en vue de la réalisation du complot, sauf dans la mesure où cette exigence de l'acte manifeste aura été écartée par le Parlement à l'égard de certaines infractions déterminées." (p. 123)

__________Recodifying Criminal Law, vol. 1, Ottawa: Law ReformCommission of Canada, 1986, [14], 117 p., ISBN: 0662547322 (series; Reports; volume 30); available at my Digital Library, at http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; information on the French version/informations sur la version française, Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, Pour une nouvelle codificationdu droit pénal, vol. 1, Ottawa : Commission de réformedu droit du Canada, 1986, [14], 117 p.,  ISBN: 0662547322 (collection; Rapports; volume 30);
 

__________Recodifying Criminal Law (Revised and Enlarged Edition of Report 30), Ottawa: Law Reform Commission of Canada, 1987, [16], 213 p., (series; Reports; volume 31), ISBN:0662547578; copy of the English version of this report is available in pdf format at my Digital Library -- Canadian Criminal Law;  Research Note:  the Commission's recommendations in this report were modified by a subsequent document: "A New General Part for the Criminal Code: Brief from the Law Reform Commission of Canada to the Subcommittee on the General Part" in Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Sub-Committee on the recodificationof the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General, supra, Issue 1 of : 25, 26, 30 March 1992, at the Appendix, pp. 1A:1 - 1A:17.  This report 31 was tabled in the House of Commons on 19 May 1988 (see House of Commons, Debates,19 May 1988 at 15609); information on the French version/informations sur la version française, Commission de réforme du droit du Canada,  Pour une nouvelle codification du droit pénal (Édition révisée et augmentée du rapport n^o30) , Ottawa: Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, 1987, [16], 233 p. (Collection; rapports; volume 31), ISBN: 0662547578; Note de recherche:  notons que les recommandations de la Commission ont été modifiées par le document "Pour une nouvelle codification de la Partie généraledu Code criminel - Mémoire présenté au sous-comitésur la Partie générale par la Commission de Réformedu droit du Canada" dans Procès-verbaux et témoignagesdu Sous-comité sur la Recodification de la Partie généraledu Code criminel du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteurgénéra , supra,  fasicule numéro 1du  25, 26, 30 mars 1992, aux  pp. 1A:29 - 1A:60.  Ce rapport31 a été déposé à la Chambre des Communes, le 19 mai 1988 (voir Chambre des Communes, Débats, 19 mai 1988 à 15609);
 

"4(5) Conspiracy.  Everyone is liable for conspiracy who agrees with another person to commit a crime and is subject to half the penalty for it.

Comment
     The law on conspiracy is principally contained in section 423 of the Criminal Code.  There are also three specific provisions: section 46(treason), and subsections 60(3) (sedition) and 424(1) (restraint of trade).  There are also specific sections in other federal statutes.  Basically, conspiracy consists of any agreement between two or more persons to commit an offence.

    Clause 4(5) roughly retains but simplifies the law.  It replaces the various provisions contained in section 423 and the other sections of the Criminal Code by one single rule.  It restricts conspiracy to agreements to commit crimes, on the ground that the Criminal Code should be, as far as possible, uniform across Canada and that if an act does not merit criminalization, then neither does an agreement to do it.

    A conspirator who goes further than agreement may become liable, of course, for committing or furthering, or of attempting furthering as the case may be." (p. 46)

.......

"4(5) Complot.  Quiconque s'entend avec autrui pour commettre un crime est responsable de complot et est passible de la moitié de la peine prévue pour le crime projeté.

Commentaire
    La majeure partie des règles actuelles concernant le complot se trouve à l'article 423 du Code criminel, auquel viennent s'ajouter trois dispositions spéciales: l'article 46 (trahison), le paragraphe 60(3) (sédition) et le paragraphe 424(1) (restriction du commerce).  On trouve en outre des dispositions spéciales sur le complot dans d'autres lois fédérales.  Essentiellement, le complot réside dans une entente conclue entre deux ou plusieurs personnes pour commettre une infraction.

    Le paragraphe 4(5) reprend le droit actuel dans ses grandes lignes tout en le simplifiant.  Les diverses dispositions qui figurent à l'article 423 et dans d'autres articles du Code criminel sont remplacées par une règle unique.  Celle-ci restreint la définition du complot à l'entente en vue de commettre un crime, et ce, pour plusieurs raisons.  D'une part, le code ne devrait avoir pour objectif que la répression des crimes auxquels il s'applique.  D'autre part, à cet égard comme à tous les autres, le droit pénal devrait, le plus possible, être uniforme partout au Canada.  Enfin, si un acte ne mérite pas les sanctions du droit pénal, l'entente en vue de l'accomplir ne le devrait pas non plus." (pp. 52-53)

___________Report on Evidence, Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 1977, x, 115 p., see pp. 26 and 72 on exception to the hearsay rule (series; reports; number 1), ISBN: 066251268; copy of the English version of this report is available in pdf format at my Digital Library -- Canadian Criminal Law; information on the French version/informations sur la version française, Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, Rapport: la preuve, Ottawa: Ministre des Approvisionnements et Services Canada, 1977, x, 131 p., voir les pp. 30 et 82 sur l'exception au ouï-dire (Collection; rapports; volume 1), ISBN: 0662512618;
 

___________Secondary Liability, Ottawa: The Law Reform Commission of Canada, 1985, [xiv], 53 p., see Chapter 5, "Conspiracy", at pp. 43-48 (series; Working Paper; number 45), ISBN:0662537491; copy of the English version of this working paper is available in pdf format at my Digital Library -- Canadian Criminal Law; also published in French / aussi publié en français: La Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, La responsabilité  secondaire , Ottawa: Commission de réforme du droit du Canada,[xv], 61 p. (Collection; document de travail; numéro 45), ISBN:0662537491;

"II. Shortcomings of Present Law

    Once again in this area, shortcomings of the law relate less to substance than to form.  First, there is a lack of generality -- despite an apparent general provision in subsection 423(2), there are three specific provisions in subsection 423(1) and numerous other provisions both in the Code and in other statutes.

    Second, there is a lack of comprehensiveness; conspiracy -- surely a term of art -- is given no definition.  As a result, one is thrown back to the common law, which is still far from clear.  What, for example, constitutes an unlawful purpose?

    Third, the law is vague and brings a risk of overcriminalization.  Consider the wide definition of conspiracy in paragraphs 423(2)(a) and (b) -- agreement 'to effect an unlawful purpose, or ... to effect a lawful purpose by unlawful means, ...' [Emphasis added] Consider too the possibility of double jeopardy in that a person can be guilty at one and the same time of committing an offence and of conspiring to commit it.

III. Rationale

    As observed earlier, there are significant differences between conspiracy and the two other inchoate offences.  For one thing, whereas incitement and attempt run roughly parallel to accessory and commission, conspiracy appears to have no counterpart at the choate level.  For another, the actus reus of conspiracy (agreeing) would seem to reduce the 'act' requirement almost to vanishing-point, while the mens rea (to effect an unlawful purpose or effect a lawful purpose by unlawful means) rides roughshod over the interests of certainty and the rule of law.

    If conspiracy has no participation counterpart, what is its rationale?  As argued earlier, the rationale for criminalizing participation, incitement and attempt is, in reality, the same as that for the complete offence: acts which are done to further violations of basic values, themselves violate such values.  Thus, if  two or more persons combine to commit a crime and thereby violate basic values, they do an act intended to furtrher such violation.  In short, the criminalization of conspiracy can be based on the same general rationale.

    Many instances of such combination could, of course, attract criminal liability without recourse to the crime of conspiracy.  In some cases, those who combine could be liable both as joint committers, or one as the committer and the other as an accessory or aider and abettor.  In others, they might both be liable as joint attempters, or one person as an attempter and the other as an inciter.  In these cases, law enforcement has no need of a separate conspiracy offence.

    Some instances of combining, however, will not be covered by the rules on participation, incitement and attempt.  Where two or more persons start planning an offence but have not gone beyond mere preparation, under present law they would not yet be guilty of attempt; a fortiori, where they agree to commit an offence but have not done nothing yet to further that agreement.  Such cases at present incur criminal liability only by virtue of the offence of conspiracy.

    However, should there be criminal liability in such cases?  First, should there be liability for a joint preparation?  To this question, two answers could be given.  One is that while mere preparation by a single individual may not seem harmful enough to count as an inchoate offence, preparation by two or more persons creates sufficient danger to do so: strength in numbers, division of labour, plotting together -- all of these call for early intervention of the law. Another answer is that if, as we suggested, 'attempt' were extended to cover any substantial act done in order to commit the crime intended, the acts of preparation, joint or several, could attract liability but without a separate crime of conspiracy.

    Next, should there be criminal liability for mere agreement?  Now while objection to the imposition of such liability might contend that this comes close to criminalizing mere intent, this is not so.  Two parties who resolve to commit a crime and then agree together to do it have gone beyond mere resolution: they have done an act in the external world: the act of agreeing between themselves.  They have done this, thinking presumably that doing it together will be easier; this could surely qualify as an act in futherance of that crime.

    Nonetheless, is it a substantial act?  The act of agreeing is even more remote from the complete offence than is the act of mere preparation.  Thus, further objection to subjecting it to criminal sanction might be mounted on the ground of its relative harmlessness as compared with joint plotting, planning and organization of crime.  Here again, strength in numbers, division of labour and so on make even mere agreement a source of danger -- organized crime, after all, begings with agreement.

    Given, then, a need for a crime of conspiracy, of what should its elements consist?  Under present law, the actus reus consists of 'conspiracy,' that is, agreeing, and the mens rea, in its widest sense, consists of the intent to effect an unlawful purpose, or a lawful purpose by unlawful means.  How far are these definitions justifiable?

    In our view, the actus reus present no great problems.  'Agreeing' is an easily understood concept -- we all know what it means to come to some agreement. Of course, in line with general principles, some positive act is necessary.  The parties must positively agree -- mere failure to dissent should not attract liability. At the same time, such agreements are not in general made openly, so that their making will often be a matter of inference from other evidence.  However, insofar as what must be inferred is an actual and not a tacit or implied agreement, no change is needed in this aspect of conspiracy.

    The same cannot be said of the mens rea aspect.  Under the present law, it is conspiracy to agree to commit a crime, a regulatory, provincial or a municipal offence, or even a mere civil wromg.  In our view, however, it should not count as conspiracy to commit regulatory, provincial or municipal offences, for two reasons.  First, if we have a Criminal Code, this document is what should control the ambit of criminality; the Code, and nothing else, should lay down what counts as an offence.  Second, the uniformity desirable in criminal law is marred by provisions making an agreement to do an act in one province a conspiracy and to do it in another not a conspiracy simply because of differences in provincial legislation.

    Nor in our view should it be a conspiracy to agree merely to effect an unlawful purpose or to effect a lawful purpose by unlawful means.  Whatever the difference between the two -- Is it a distinction without a difference?  -- the term 'unlawful' is far too vague and far too wide.  Because of its use in the definition of conspiracy, no one can tell for certain what is and what is not covered by the offence.  This contravenes the rule of law.

    One further argument is crucial in the Canadian context.  In Canada, the making of the criminal law has been entrusted to Parliament.  Where Parliament regards behaviour as a grave enough social evil to require criminal sanction, it can make it a crime.  However, where Parliament has not seen fit to make an act a crime, the mere agreement to do such an act should not become, by the back door as it were, a crime by reason of provincial or other provisions.  All criminal law belongs to Parliament.

    In our opinion, the crime of conspiracy should consist of agreement by two or more persons to commit an act defined by the Code as a criminal offence.  Whether or not the acts in question should be restricted to the more serious (that is, indictable) offences cannot be answered pending conclusions on the classification of offences.  In principle, however, if conspiracy is to be a serious offence, then the acts agreed on ought also to be only those that are serious in nature.

IV. Double Jeopardy

    In our view, no one should be liable to conviction for both an inchoate offence and the full offence in question.  If the offence is completed and the person contributed to it, he should be liable as a party.  If it is not completed or if he make no actual contribution to it, he should at most be liable for an inchoate offence.  Accordingly, a person charged with an offence but proved only to have conspired to do it should be convicted, not of the offence, but of conspiracy.

    A person charged with conspiracy but found to have been involved with the full offence presents a problem.  On the one hand, he clearly should not be acquitted and should, at least, be convicted of conspiracy.  On the other hand, it would hardly be fair to convict him of the full offence and subject him to the full penalty when that was not the charge he had to meet.

    Our tentative view is that he should be liable for conspiracy and subject to penalty for half the offence." (pp. 46-48)

LAYTON, David, "R. v. Pilarinos: Evaluating the Co-Conspirators or Joint Venture Exception to the Hearsay Rule", (2002) 2 Criminal Reports (6th) 293-314;
 

LEDERMAN, Peter R., "Sedition in Winnipeg: An Examination of the Trials for Seditious Conspiracy Arising from the General Strike of 1919", (1976-77) 3(2) Queen's Law Journal 3-24;
 

LEGAL AID ONTARIO / AIDE JURIDIQUE ONTARIO -- LAO  LAW, Criminal law Memoranda, Toronto, catalogue current as of February 1, 2006; see http://www.lss.bc.ca/__shared/assets/LAOlawindex1225.pdf  and http://www.legalaid.on.ca/ (both sites accessed on 24 February 2006); see:
- O2-2, "Conspiracy -- Overview", 10 June 2003, 39 p.;
- O31-5, "Conspiracy -- Drugs", 25 February 2003, 34 p.;
 

LIBMAN, Rick,  1956-,  The Law of Robbery, Toronto: Carswell, 1990, xix, 388 p., see Chapter 9, "Conspiracy to Commit Robbery" at pp. 197-217, ISBN: 0459340719;
 

LOPEZ, Tammy, "The Concept of Withdrawal from a Conspiracy", UCWR, 2001, iv, 23 p.; New England School of Law International War Crime project; available at  http://www.nesl.edu/center/wcmemos/2001/lopez.pdf (accessed on 21 October 2005); deals with Canadian law;
 

MACKAY, R.S., "Criminal Law -- Conspiracy, Between Husband and  Wife -- Common Law Defence and Fiction of Unity -- Application of Common Law to Criminal Code -- Judicial Lawmaking", (1955) 33 Canadian Bar Review 75; comments on Kowbel v. The Queen, [1954] S.C.R. 498; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals, KE 365 .A2 C344;
 

MacKINNON, Peter, "Conspiracy and Sedition as Canadian Political Crime", (1977) 23 McGill Law Journal 622-643;

"The flexibility of the conspiracy offence as a weapon against political dissent is further enhanced by the vague definition of sedition and the open.endedness of common law conspiracy. In this country we have had experience with seditious conspiracy charges, notably in historical circumstances in which a particular group has been perceived as a direct threat to government: labour leaders during the Winnipeg General Strike; communists during the depression; Doukhobors in the nineteen-sixties; and Quebec separatists in 1970." (p. 670)

___________Notes, "The Contract as Conspiracy: A Critique of Regina v. Sokoloski , [1977] 2 S.C.R. 523, 13 N.R. 191", (1978) 10 Ottawa Law Review 448-455;
 

___________Criminal Conspiracy in Canada: A Critical Study,  LL.M. thesis, University of Saskatchewan, 1975, xi, 114 p;
 

___________"Developments in the Law of Criminal Conspiracy", (1981) 59 Canadian Bar Review 301-318; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals, KE 365 .A2 C344;
 

___________Reviews, "Criminal Conspiracy in Canada.  By Matthew R. Goode...",  (1977) 4 Dalhousie Law Journal 212-221;
 

MacFARLANE, Bruce A. et al., Federal prosecutors seminar 1980 : papers III, [S.n : s.l., 1980], 161 p.; title noted in my research; not consulted; copy at Justice Canada, Ontario Regional Office, Library/Justice Canada, Bureau régional de l'Ontario, Bibliothèque, KF/9640/A75/F42/1980c;
 

MACFARLANE, Bruce A., Chantal Proulx, 1964-, and Robert Frater, Drug Offences in Canada, 3rd ed., Aurora (Ontario): Canada Law Book, 1996-,  looseleaf, see volume I, 40 p. (as of June 2005); copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF3890 M32 1996;

"[Table of Contents -- Chapter 8] Conspiracy

                         Paragraph
- Introduction.....8.20
- Defining the offence...8.100
- Elements of the Offence...8.100

- Actus Reus....8.200
- Mens Rea...8.380
- Parties to the Agreement...8.520

- Conspiracy Indictments and the Scope of the Offence...8.750

- Sufficiency of the Count...8.750
- Conspiracy versus Charging the Substantive Offence...8.920
- Multiple Conspiracies...8.1100
- Buy-Sell Conspiracy...8.1420
- Jurisdictional Considerations (Conspiracies with a 'Foreign Flavour')...8.1860

- Evidentiary Matters...8.2100

- Co-Conspirator Exception to the Hearsay Rule...8.2100

- Generally...8.2100
- Doctrine of Conditional Asmissibility...8.2220
- Accused Membership in the Conspiracy...8.2300
- The 'In Futherance' Requirement...8.2500
- Charging the Jury...8.2680

- Association...8.2820
- Expert Evidence Respecting the Operation of a Drug Trafficking Ring...8.2860

- Defences...8.2860

- Impossibility...8.3060
- Abandonment...8.3180" (p. 8-1, dated December 2004)

McLEAN, Donald G., "Conspiracy: Admissible Evidence and Method of Proof", (1978-79) 21 The Criminal Law Quarterly 286-317;
 

___________"The Conspiracy Indictment", (1978-79) 21 The Criminal Law Quarterly 96-124;
 

McMAHON, Kirsten, "It takes two to conspire: Court of Appeal", (26 September 2005) 16(29) Law Times 5; Ontario Court of Appeal, decision of Justice David Doherty, appelants: Harry Alexander and Norris Blake;
 

MEWETT, Alan W., 1930-, " Proposals to amend the Criminal Code, June 28, 1993 : clause 9, s.24.2, conspiracy",  [Ottawa] : Law Reform Division, Dept. of Justice Canada, 1994, 8 p ; 28 cm., available at my Digital Library; also published in French/aussi publié en français: "Proposition de modification du Code criminel, le 28 juin 1993 : article 9, complot, article 24.2,   [Ottawa] : Division de la réforme du droit, Ministère de la justice du Canada, 1994, 8 p. ; 28 cm., copy at the National Library in Ottawa: AMICUS No. 16835844, Monograph, COPIES:  Preserv Copy - COP.CA.2.1997-1636 - NO ILL//, disponible à ma Bibliothèque numérique;
 

MEWETT, Allan W., 1930-, and Morris Manning, Mewett & Manning on Criminal Law (previously published under title: Criminal Law), 3rd ed, Toronto: Butterworths, 1994, lxiv, 959 p., ISBN: 0409903752 (bound) and 0433396458 (pbk.); "Table of Contents...Chapter 9: Unfilled Offences...303 to 346... III. Conspiracy: (1) Definition; (2) Liability for conspiracy; (3) Proof of conspiracy; (4) Abandonment; (5) Merger; (6) Impossibility; (7) Conspiracies and the Charter";
 

NASH, The Honourable Madam Eileen M., "Conspiracy"  in National Criminal Law Program (1998: Victoria, B.C.), [ed.],  National Criminal Law Program, The Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Victoria : Federation of Law Societies, 1998, ",   vol. 1 of 2, section 1.3, 18 p.; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, Ottawa, KF9220 ZA2 N38 1998 v. 1 c. 01;
 

PACIOCCO, David M., and Lee Stuesser, The Law of Evidence, 3rd ed., Toronto:  Irwin Law, 2002, xxii, 494 p., see "Admissions by Parties in Futherance of a Common Design", at pp. 126-130 (series; Essentials of Canadian Law), ISBN: 1552210685; copy at Ottawa University, FTX Reserve, KE 8440 .P33 2002;
 

PARKER, Graham E., 1933-, An introduction to Criminal Law, 3rd ed., Agincourt (Ontario): Methuen Publications, 1987, viii, 452 p., and see "Inchoate Crime II: Conspiracy, The Crime of the 1960s", at pp. 241-247, ISBN: 0458806803;

"The crime of conspiracy has always been used as a political weapon and justifiably has been called 'the little darling of the prosecutor's nursery.'" (p. 241)

"We have seen that conspiracy is not only a political weapon but also a moral one." (p. 245)

"Conspiracy is a powerful weapon.  Much greater punishments can be imposed for mere agreement than for some complete crimes." (p. 245)

"Conspiracy has often been justified on the basis that there is a social danger in numbers. ...The idea of a combination being more dangerous than a single person's acts has its origin in the State's apprehension about workers combining to defy an employer, to break up machinery, or to close a factory" (p. 245)

"The other criticism is the vagueness of the concept." (p. 245)

____________"Notes: Quasi-criminal Law -- Two Problems arising out of Saskatchewan Cases", (June 1963) 28(2) Saskatchewan Bar Review 70-89, see "Common Law Conspiracy and Provincial Legislation", at pp. 71-77; R. v. Sommervill and Kaylich; (1962) 40 WWR 577 (Sask. C.A.);
 

___________"Wright, McDermott and Feeley v. The Queen (1964), 43 D.L.R. (2d) 597 -- Common Law Conspiracy", (1964-65) 7 The Criminal Law Quarterly 145-146;
 

POPPLE, A.E., Annotation, "Acquittal of One or More of Several Defendants in a Conspiracy Case", (1946-47) 2 Criminal Reports 175-179;
 

___________"Conspiracy", (1953-54) 17 Criminal Reports 81-87;
 

POWELL, Clay M., "Conspiracy Prosecutions", (1970-71) 13 The Criminal Law Quarterly 34-69;
 

RIKHOF, Joseph, "War Crimes Law, as Applied in Canada", and see "Complicity", available at  http://www.carleton.ca/law/outlines/f00/336at-FREDICTONJOSEPH.htm (accessed on 29 August 2005);
 

RITCHIE, Roland A., "The Crime of Conspiracy", (1938) 16 Canadian Bar Review 202-211; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals, KE 365 .A2 C344;
 

ROACH, Kent, 1961-, Criminal Law, 3rd ed., Toronto : Irwin Law, 2004, xx, 421 p., on conspiracy, see pp. 120-124 (series; Essentials of Canadian Law), ISBN: 155221091X; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Reserve, KE 8809 .R624 2004;
 

___________"The New Terrorism Offences and the Criminal Law", in Ronald J. (Ronald Joel) Daniels, 1959-, Patrick Macklem, and Kent Roach, eds., The Security of Freedom: Essays on Canada's Anti-Terrorism Bill, Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2002, vii, 499 p., at pp. 151-194, and see in particular, "Piling Inchoate Liability on Top of Inchoate Crimes", at pp. 159-160, ISBN: 0802085199; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General, KE 9007 .S42 2001;
 

ROSENBERG, Marc, "Conspiracy" in National Criminal Law Program: Substantive Criminal Law (1993: Montreal), [ed.],  National Criminal Law Program, The Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Montreal (PQ): Federation of Law Societies, 1993, 2 volumes; information from  http://gate.library.ualberta.ca/ (The GATE:  NEOS Libraries' Catalogue) as seen on 11 November 2000; document not consulted;
 

ROWAN, John, "Conspiracy and Parties", 7 p. in Fraud in Commercial Transactions, Materials Prepared for a Continuing Legal Education Seminar Held in Vancouver, B.C., October 1, 1982/ course co-ordinator, A.G. Henderson ; leaders, W.S. Berardino ... [et al.], Vancouver : Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia, 1982, 1 v. (various pagings), 30 cm, ISBN: 086504080X; note: "PA 82241"; title noted in my research but document not consulted;
 

SAMUELS, Sharon and Gil D. McKinnon, "Conspiracy", March 1992, 45 p., working paper; referred to in CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION,  CRIMINAL RECODIFICATION TASK FORCE, supra, p. 190;

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE...1

A. English Approach...1

B. Canadian Approach...4

1. Present Codification...4
2. Historical Development...6

II. THE NATURE OF CONSPIRACY...8

A. General Overview...8

1. Justification for Conspiracy...8

B. Elements of Conspiracy...9

1. "Agreement to Achieve a Common Purpose/Particular Object"...10

a. Agreement as the actus reus of conspiring...10
b. Achievement of a Common purpose...11
c. Tacit Agreement...11
d. Ongoing Agreements...12
e. Agreement for the Purpose of Contract...12

2. "Intention to Adhere to the Agreement" - Mens Rea...14

a. Intention or "Purpose"...14
b. Recklessness, Negligence and Strict Liability Offences...16
c. Defining "Conspiracy"...17

3. "Knowledge of the General Nature of the Conspiracy"...19

4. "Between Two or More Persons"...19

a. Numerous Parties...20
b. Spousal Immunity Rule...21
c. Incapacitated Persons to a Conspiracy...22
d."Would-Be" Conspirators...23
e. Corporate conspiracy...23

5. "Purpose prohibited by statute"...24

C. Merger...25

D. Attempted Conspiracy and Conspiracy to Attempt

1. Attempted Conspiracy...26
2. Conspiracy to Attempt...27

E. Counselling and Conspiracy...27

F. Defences...28

1. Abandonment...28
2. Impossibility

G. Jurisdiction...30
H. Evidentiary considerations...31

III. CODIFICATION...32

A. Canada -- Draft Criminal Code...32
B. Other Anglo-American Jurisdictions...34

1. United Kingdom...34
2. United States
3. Australia...39
4. New Zealand...41

IV. ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION...43

SOPINKA, John, 1933-, Sidney N. Lederman, 1943-,  and Alan W. Bryant, 1943, The Law of Evidence in Canada, 2nd ed.  Toronto:  Butterworths, 1999, xxvii, 1150 p., see "Statements by Persons Engaged with Others in a Common Purpose Design", at pp. 303-307; copy at the University, FTX Reserve, KE 8440 .S6 1999;
 

___________The law of evidence in Canada, second edition. Supplement, [Toronto]: Butterworths, 2004, xvi, 175 p., see "Statements by Persons Engaged with Others in a Common Purpose Design", at pp. 46-49; ISBN: 0433443278; copy at Ottawa University, FTX Reserve, KE 8440 .S62 2004;
 

SPEYER, Jocelyn, "Conspiracy"  in National criminal law program (2001 : Charlottetown, P.E.I.), ed., National criminal law program / The Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Charlottetown : Federation of Law Societies, 2001, in vol. 1 of 2; copy at Department of Justice Canada, Prairies Region, Edmonton Office, Law Library, call number: KF 9655 N36 2001;
 

STENNING, Philip C., "Observation on the Supreme Court of Canada's Decision in R. v. Osborn", (1970-71) 13 The Criminal Law Quarterly 164-183;
 

STEWART, Hamish, "Hearsay after Starr", (2002) 7 Canadian Criminal Law Review 5-18, see pp. 15-16; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 8802 .C345  Location: FTX Periodicals;
 

STUART, Don, "Annotation: R. v. Mapara, (2005) 28(1) C.R. (6th) 1 (S.C.C.)", (2005) 28(1) Criminal Reports (6th) 4 (1 p. only);
 

___________Canadian Criminal Law: A Treatise, 4th ed.,  Scarborough: Carswell, a Thomson Company, 2001, liv, 733 p., ISBN: 0459261703 and 0459261118 (pbk.);  there is now a 5th ed.: Toronto: Thomson/Carswell, 2007, xix, 815 p., ISBN: 978 0779812950;

"Table of Contents:...
Chapter 10 Incomplete Crimes: Attempts, Conspiracy and Counselling... 653
..
.B. Conspiracy...675
1. Common Law History...675
2. Legislative Background...676
3. Abolishing Common Law Conspiracies...678
4. General Doctrine...678

(1) Agreement for Common Purpose...680
(2) Between Two or More Persons...688:

(a) Spouses...688
(b) One Person Companies...690
(c) Agents Provocateurs...690

(3) Purpose Prohibited by Statute...691

(a) Conspiracy to commit indictable offence...692
(b) Conspiracy to commit summary conviction offence...693

5. Need to Further Restrict Conspiracy...696
6. Voluntary Desistance...697
7. Impossible Conspiracies...698
8. Merger...698
9. Specialized Conspiracies...700" (pp. ix, xv-xvi, 4th ed.)

__________"Conspiracy", (1976) 8 The Ottawa Law Review 107-155; note: "This article was originally prepared for the Law Reform Commission of Canada." (p. 107);
 

STUART, Don, 1943-, and R.J. Delisle, compiled by, Learning Canadian criminal law, 9th ed., Toronto: Carswell, 2004, xxix, 1199 p., on conspiracy, see pp. 1119-1136; cases: R. v. Celebrity Enterprises (No.2), (1977) 42 C.C.C. 478 (B.C. C.A.);  R. v. Gralewicz, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 493; and R. v. Dungley, (1979) 51 C.C.C. (2d) 86 (Ont. C.A.);  ISBN: 0459241249 (pbk.); copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada;
 

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA / COUR SUPRÊME DU CANADA

- Bolduc v. Att. Gen of Quebec, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 573-588;
- Cloutier v. The King, [1940] S.C.R. 131-139;
- Cipolla v. The Queen, [1966] 1 C.C.C. 179 (Ont. C.A.) affirmed [1965] S.C.R. v;
- Container Materials Ltd. et al. v. The King, [1942] S.C.R. 147-160;
- Cox and Paton v. The Queen, [1963] S.C.R. 500-522;
- Gralewicz et al. v. The Queen, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 493-512;
- Guimond v. The Queen, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 960-982;
- Koufis v. The King, [1941] S.C.R. 481-490;
- Kowbel v. The Queen, [1954] S.C.R. 498-512;
- McFall v. The Queen, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 321-347;
- Papalia v. The Queen; The Queen  v. Cotroni; [1979] 2 S.C.R. 256-288;
- Paradis v. The King, [1934] S.C.R. 165-173;
- R. v. Ackworth, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 291 (http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1987/vol2/index.html); affirming R. v. Patterson, Ackworth and Kovach,
      (1985) 18 C.C.C. (3d) 137 (Ont. C.A.);
- R. v. Brodie, [1936[ S.C.R. 188-200;
- R. v. Carter, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 938-948;
- R. v. Dass (1979) 47 C.C.C. (2d) 194 (Man. C.A.), leave to appeal refused 30 N.R. 609n;
- R. v. Déry, 2006 SCC 53 (November 23, 2006); http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2006/2006scc53/2006scc53.html (accessed on 24 November 2006); no offence of attempted conspiracy;
- R. v. Douglas, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 301-325;
- R. v. Filiault and Kane (1981) 63 C.C.C. (2d) 321 (Ont. C.A.), affirmed [1984] 1 S.C.R. 387 (1 p. only);
- R. v. Gunn, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 522-529;
- R. v. Kelly (1916) 27 C.C.C. 140 (Man. C.A.), affirmed (1917) 54 S.C.R. 220-264;
- R. v. Koury, [1964] S.C.R. 212-231;
- R. v. Lawrence (1987) 38 C.C.C. (3d) 128, affirmed on other grounds [1988] 1 S.C.R. 619-620;
- R. v. Mapara, 2005 SCC 23;
- R. v. McNamara (1981) 56 C.C.C. (2d) 193 (Ont. C.A.), affirmed on other grounds [1985] 1 S.C.R. 662-720, sub nomine: Canadian Dredge & Dock Co. Ltd. v. The Queen (S.C.C.) (leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused with three exceptions 37 N.R. 85n;
- R. v. Miller and Cockriell (1995) 24 C.C.C. (2d) 401 (B.C. C.A.) affirmed [1977] 2 S.C.R. 680-715;
- R. v. O'Brien, [1954] S.C.R. 666;
- R. v. Paterson, Ackworth and Kovach (1985) 18 C.C.C. (3d) 137, affirmed [1987] 2 S.C.R. 291;
- R. v. Rowbotham; R. v. Roblin, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 834-835 ( http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1993/vol4/index.html) and [1994] 2 S.C.R. 463
   ( http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1994/vol2/index.html; affirming  (1992) 76 C.C.C. (3d) 542 (Ont. C.A.);
- R. v. Rooke (1987) 35 C.C.C. (3d) 385 (B.C. C.A.), affirmed [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1020-1024;
- R. v. Saunders, [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1020-1024 (http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1990/vol1/index.html);
- R. v. Sutton, (1999) 140 C.C.C. (3d) 336 (N.B. C.A.), affirmed [2000] 2 S.C.R. 595-599 ( http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/2000/vol2/index.html);
- R. v. White (1997) 114 C.C.C. (3d) 225 (Ont. C.A.), leave to appeal to S.C.C. refused 224 N.R. 238n;
- Sheppe v. The Queen, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 22-28;
- Sokoloski v. The Queeen [1977] S.C.R. circa;
- The Queen  v. Gagnon, [1956] S.C.R. 635-640;
- United States of America v. Dynar, [1997] 2 S.C.R. 462-538 (http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1997/vol2/index.html);
- Wright, McDennott and Feeley v. The Queen, [1964] S.C.R.;
 

THOMAS, R.G., Annotation, "Joinder of conspiracy and substantive offences",  (1966-67) 49 Criminal Reports 252-261;
 

VAUGHAN, M.B., "Common Law Conspiracy in Canada", (1965) 23 University of Toronto Faculty Law Review 129-136;
 

VERDUN-JONES, Simon N. (Simon Nicholas), 1947-, VERDUN-JONES, Simon N. (Simon Nicholas), 1947-,  Criminal Law in Canada: Cases, Questions & The Code, 4th ed., Thomson/Nelson, 2006,  xvi, 332 p., see Chapter 7, "Modes of Participation in Crime and Inchoate Offences" at pp. 142-179, ISBN: 0176407170; copy at the Library of Parliament, Br.B  KE 8809 V47 2007;
 

WATT, David, 1848-, Ontario Specimen Jury Instructions (Criminal), Toronto: Carswell-Thomson, 2003, xxiii, 1101 p.,  see on conspiracy, pp. 907-919; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF9682 W38 2003;
 

WHITZMAN, Stephen, "Proof of Conspiracy: the Co-conspirator's  Exception to the Hearsay Rule", (1985-86) 28 The Criminal Law Quarterly 203-225;
 

WILSON, Wes, "The Political Use of Criminal Conspiracy", (1984) 42 University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 60-;
 

B- Competition Act / Loi sur la concurrence
 

ADDY, George, 1953-, John Bodrug, and Lori Cornwall, from the firm Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP, Toronto, "A Canadian Perspective on the Investigation and Prosecution of Cartel Behaviour", Instituto Brasileiro de Estudos das Relaçoes de Concorrência e de Consumo, November 28-29, 2003, Campos de Jordao, Brazil, 22 p., 7 p. [Appendix 1], 3 p. [Appendix II], 3 p. [Appendix III], 2 p. [Appendix IV], 1 p. [Appendix V]; available at  http://www.dwpv.com/images/ACanadianPerspectiveontheInvestigationandProsecutionofCartelBehaviourBrazilNovember28292003(1).PDF (accessed on 27 June 2005);
 

ADDY, George, 1953-, Lori Cornwall, Charles Tingley, from the firm Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP, Toronto, Canada, Insight Inromation, "Proposed Amendments to the Conspiracy Provisions", January 20, 2004, Hôtel Inter-Continental Montréal, Québec; available at  http://www.dwpv.com/images/ProposedAmendmentstotheConspiracyProvisionsJanuary202004(1).PDF (accessed on 19 June 2005); important contribution;
 

ADDY, George, 1953-, and William L. Vanveen, 1953-, Competition Law Service, Aurora (Ontario): Canada Law Book, 1988-, looseleaf service, 4 volumes: ISSBN: vol. 1: 0888040539; Vol. 2: 0888041691; vol. 3: 0888043244; and vol. 4: 0888044445; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF 1649 A32;
 

AFFLECK, Donald S. (firm of Kelley Affleck Greene), "Agreements in Restraint of Trade", 24 p., in Ontario Bar Association, Continuing Legal Association, Essentials of Competition Law, Monday, May 13, 2002, Toronto: Ontario Bar Association, Continuing Legal Education, 2002, various pagings, ISBN: 1551723484; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF 1650 ZA2 E87 2002;
 

BÉRIAULT, Yves, 1943-, Madeleine Renault, 1956-,  and Yves Comtois, 1963-, Le droit de la concurrence au Canada, Scarborough, Ont. : Carswell, 1999, liv, 516 p., ISBN: 0459233637; copie à l'Université d'Ottawa, FTX Reserve, KE 1639 .B47 1999;
 

BRADLEY, Shona, from the firm of Frase & Beatty, Toronto, "Implementing Foreign Conspiracies: Guilty Notwithstanding?", (1993) 14(3) Canadian Competition Record  56-66; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 1632 .C34  Location, FTX Periodicals;
 

CAIRNS, James P., "Aetna Insurance, Eastern Sugar and 'Unduly' in the Combines Investigation Act: Still More Confusion", (1980-81) 5 Canadian Business Law Journal 231-238; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 912 .C343  Location: FTX Periodicals;
 

CAMPBELL, Colin, "Criminal Offences: Review Practice and Recent Developments", in Law Society of Upper Canada, Department of Education, ed., Recent developments and practices in competition law, Toronto : Law Society of Upper Canada, Department of  Education, 1991, 1 v. (various pagings); notes: "These materials were planned and organized for the program held in Toronto on April 26, 1991"; copy at the Department of Justice Canada, Library Services, Ottawa, KB/41/.R245; title noted in my research but article not consulted;
 

CANADA, Government of Canada, Government Response to the Report of the House of Commons Standing Committeeon Industry, Science and Technology
"A Plan to Modernize Canada's Competition Regime", [Ottawa], October 2002, 17 p., available at  http://www.ic.gc.ca/cmb/welcomeic.nsf/ICPages/SpecialReports (accessed on 6 February 2004); also available in French / aussi disponible en français: CANADA, Chambre des communes, Réponse du gouvernement au Rapport final du Comité permanent de l'industrie, des sciences et de la technologie, « Plan d'actualisation du régime de concurrence canadien », octobre 2002, 17 p., disponible à http://www.ic.gc.ca/cmb/welcomeic.nsf/ICPages/RapportsSpeciaux (visionné le 6 février 2005);
 

CANADA, Government of Canada, Options for Amending the Competition Act: Fostering a Competitive Marketplace Ottawa, 23 June 2003, 39 p.  (the White Paper; discussion paper), available at http://www.ppforum.ca/competitionact/dp2003.pdf (accessed on 18 June 2005); also available in French / aussi disponible en français: CANADA, Gouvernement du Canada, Options pour la modification de la Loi sur la concurrence: la promotion de marchés concurrentiels, Ottawa, 20 juin 2003, 41 p.,  disponible à http://www.ppforum.ca/competitionact/dp2003_f.pdf (visionné le 19 juin 2005);
 

CANADA, Parliament, An Act to amend the Combines Investigation Act and the Criminal Code, S.C.  1960, c. 45 (assented to 10 August 1960); repealed and reintroduced...the Combines Investigation Act; also available in French / aussi disponible en français: CANADA, Parlement, Chambre des communes, Loi modifiant la loi relative aux enquêtes sur les coaltions et le Code criminel;, L.C. 1960, chapitre 45;
 

CANADA, Parliament, House of Commons, Bill C-472, An Act to Amend the Competition Act (conspiracy agreements and right to make private applications), the Competition Tribunal Act (costs and summary dispositions) and the Criminal Code as a consequence, first reading 6 April 2001, tabled by Mr. McTeague, available at  http://www.parl.gc.ca/PDF/36/2/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/private/C-472_1.pdf (accessed on 21 June 2005); CANADA, Parlement, Chambre des communes, Projet de loi C-472, Loi modifiant la Loi sur la concurrence (collusion et droit des particuliers de présenter une demande), la Loi sur le Tribunal de la concurrence (dépens et procédure sommaire) et le Code criminel en conséquence, première lecture, le 6 avril 2000, projet de loi présenté par monsieur McTeague, available at  http://www.parl.gc.ca/PDF/36/2/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/private/C-472_1.pdf (visionné le 21 juin 2005);
 

CANADA, Parliament, House of Commons, House of Commons Debates, Third Session -- Twenty-Fourth Parliament, 8-9 Elizabeth II, volume IV, 1960, Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1960; also available in French/aussi disponible en français: Compte Rendu Officiel des Débats de la Chambre des Communes, Troisième session de la vingt-quatrième législature, volume IV, 1960, Ottawa: Imprimeur de la Reine, 1960;

"[Mr. Fulton] First, in so far as the substantive changes are concerned, it will have been noted, I am sure, that the provisions of the Criminal code relating to combinations in restraint of trade are moved out of the Criminal Code and into the Combines Investigation Act.  The result will be, when the new bill passes, that the Combines Investigation Act will contain all the anti-combines legislation.  Sections 411, 412 and 416 of the Criminal Code would then be repealed.  There are a variety of arguments, which have been made both for and against this proposition.  Many of them were summarized in the MacQuarrie committee report to which I have referred.  After listening to the representations and discussing them in detail with those who made them, as well as reviewing the MacQuarrie committee study, we came to the conclusion that in view of the desirability of achieving certainty and clarification in the combines legislation, and in view of the changing nature of economic conditions, it would be desirable to consolidate into the one combines act." (p. 4346)
[note: Debates before second reading of Bill C-58, An Act to amend the Combines Investigation Act and the Criminal Code, which was subsequently assented to on 10 August 1960 and became S.C. 1960, c. 45]

-----

"[L'hon. Fulton] D'abord, en ce qui concerne les changements de fond, on a noté, j'en suis sûr, que les dispositions du Code criminel relatives aux pratiques restrictives du commerce en sont supprimées pour être versées dans la loi relative aux enquêtes sur les coalitions.  Lorsque le nouveau bill sera adopté, il s'ensuivra que la loi relative aux enquêtes sur les coalitions va renfermer toute la législation contre les coalitions.  Les articles 411, 412 et 416 du Code criminel seraient donc abrogés.  On a apporté une série d'arguments pour et contre cette proposition.  Un grand nombre d'entre eux étaient résumés dans le rapport du comité MacQuarrie dont j'ai parlé.  Après avoir entendu des instances et en avoir discuté en détail avec ceux qui les avaient formulées, ainsi qu'après avoir examiné l'étude du comité MacQuarrie, nous avons conclu que vu l'avantage de mettre au point et de tirer au clair la législation contre les coalitions, et vu l'évolution des conditions économiques, il serait souhaitable de codifier toutes les dispositions dans la loi relative aux enquêtes sur les conditions." (p. 4533)  [Débats avant la deuxième lecture du Projet de loi C-58,  Loi modifiant la loi relative aux enquêtes sur les coaltions et le Code criminel, sanctionnée le 10 août 1960 et devenu L.C. 1960, ch. 45]

CANADA, Parliament, House of Commons, Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology, Report of the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology A Plan to Modernize Canada’s Competition Regime, presented in the House of Commons on 23 April 2002 (Chair: Walt Lastewka, M.P.) available at  http://www.parl.gc.ca/committee/CommitteePublication.aspx?COM=221&SourceId=37149 (accessed on 6 February 2005), and see in particular chapter 4 "Conspiracies and other Horizontal Agreements"; also available in French/aussi disponible en français: CANADA, Chambre des communes, Comité permanent de l'industrie, des sciences et de la technologie, Rapport du Comité permanent de l’industrie, des sciences et de la technologie, Plan d’actualisation du régime de concurrence canadien, présenté à la Chambre des communes, le 23 avril 2003 (Président: Walt Lastewka, député), disponible à  http://www.parl.gc.ca/committee/CommitteePublication.aspx?COM=221&SourceId=37149&SwitchLanguage=1 (visionné le 6 février 2005) et voir en particulier le Chapitre 4, "Complots et autres ententes horizontales";
 

____________Interim Report on the Competition Act, Seventh Report of the Standing Committee on Industry, June 2002 (Chair: Susan Whelan, M.P.), available at  http://www.parl.gc.ca/InfoComDoc/36/2/INDU/Studies/Reports/indu01-e.html (accessed on 18 June 2005); also available in French/aussi disponible en français: Rapport intérimaire sur la loi sur la concurrence,  Septième rapport du Comité permanent de l'industrie, Juin 2002 (Présidente: Susan Whelan, députée), disponible à  http://www.parl.gc.ca/InfoComDoc/36/2/INDU/Studies/Reports/indu01-f.html (visionné le 18 juin 2005);
 

CANADA, Parliament, House of Commons, Report of the Select Committee Appointed 29th February, 1888, to Investigate and Report Upon Alleged Combinations in Manufactures, Trade and Insurance in Canada, Submitted to the House of Commons by the Chairman of the Committee, N.C. Wallace, Ottawa: MacLean, Roger (Printers), 1888, xxv, 750 p. in Appendix to the Twenty-Second Volume of the Journals of the House of Commons, Dominion Of Canada, From the 23rd February, 1888, to the 22nd May, 1888, Session 1888, Ottawa: Brown Chamberlin, Queen's printer, 1888; note: Appendix 3; also available in French/aussi disponible en français: CANADA, Chambre des communes, Rapport du Comité spécial sur les prétendues coalitions industrielles, commerciales et d'assurance existant en Canada, Ottawa: Brown Chamberlin, Imprimeur de la Reine et Contrôleur de la papeterie, 1888, xxv, 770 p. dans Appendice au Vingt-deuxième volume des Journaux de la Chambre des Communes du Canada, du 23 février, 1888, au 22 mai, 1888, inclusivement, Session 1888, Ottawa: Imprimé par Brown Chamberlin, Imprimeur de la Reine et Contrôleur de la papeteries, 1888;
 

CANADA, Committee to Study Combines Legislation, Report to the Minister of Justice of Committee to Study Combines Legislation, [Ottawa]: [The Committee], 1952, 147 p. (Josiah H. MacQuarrie, 1897-, Chairman); note: the other members of the Committee were : W.A. Mackintosh, G.F. Curtis and Maurice Lamontagne; copy at the Library of Parliament, HD 2807 A5 1951 A122; the reference for the published version is: Canada. Department of Justice, Committee on Combines  Legislation, MacQuarrie, Josiah H., 1897-, Report of the Committee to study combines legislation and interim report on Resale price maintenance,  [Ottawa : Queen's Printer, 1952], 72 p. (J.H. MacQuarrie, chairman);

"Criminal Prosecution

(a) Consolidation of Legislation

    The reasons for sections 498 and 498A of the Criminal Code and sections 2 and 32 of the Act taking separate existence are, in the main, historical and are traced in an earlier part of this report.  In our opinion no injustice has resulted but there is some merit, on the grounds of convenience, in the suggestion that the legislation should be consolidated.  Combines legislation is not static and the need for periodic review is an important feature of it.  Such review may lead from time to time to necessary amendments being made, as experience with the working of the Act develops, and there would be certain drafting advantages in having the legislation in the one Act.  We do not recommend, however, that any of the offences set forth in the Combines Investigation Act or in sections 498 and 498A of the Criminal Code be done away with.  Our recommendation rather is that consideration be given to the tranfer to the Combines Investigation Act of those parts of sections 498 and 498A of the Criminal Code which create offences not now contained in the Combines Investigation Act." (p. 46 of the 147 p. report)

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF POLICE CHIEFS, THE, "Comments of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police on the Discussion Paper Options for Amending the Competition Act: Fostering a Competitive Marketplace", October 2005, available at http://www.ppforum.com/competitionact/Cdn_Association_of_Chiefs_of_Police.pdf (accessed on 14 February 2005);
 

CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION (http://www.cba.org/CBA/Home.asp)/
ASSOCIATION DU BARREAU CANADIEN ( http://www.cba.org/ABC/Accueil.asp):

National Competition Law Association (http://www.cba.org/CBA/Sections/Competition/)/
Section nationale du droit de la concurrence (http://www.cba.org/ABC/Sections/Competition_f/)

- "CBA Competition Law Section.  Section 45 Amendments Task Force Report", (Summer 2003) 21(3) Canadian Competition Record 27-38; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 1632 .C34  Location, FTX Periodicals;

- "Submission on reform of Section 45 of he Competition Act (Conspiracy)", February 2003, 31 p., and Annex A (11 p.), Annex B (5 p.) and Annex C (5 p.), available at  http://www.cba.org/CBA/submissions/pdf/03-05-eng.pdf  (accessed on 19 June 2005); available in English only;

- "Proposed Reform of the Conspiracy Provisions: Comments on the Draft Legislation contained in the Government Discussion Paper – June 2003", Canadian Bar Association (2003);

CANADIAN COMPETITION POLICY PAGE, available at http://csgb.ubc.ca/ccpp/ (accessed on 26 June 2005);
 

CAYNE, David, "Market Power, Efficiencies, and the Public Interest in Canadian Combines Law", (1970) 16 McGill Law Review 488-532;
 

CHANDLER, Harry and Robert Jackson, "Beyond Merriment and Diversion: The Treatment of Conspiracies under Canada's Competition Act", Competition Bureau, 2000, Toronto; available at  http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/incb-bc.nsf/en/ct01767e.html (accessed on 6 February 2005); also available in French /aussi disponible en français: "Au-delà de l'amusement et de la détente : Le traitement des complots en vertu de la Loi sur la concurrence du Canada", Bureau de la concurrence, 2000, disponible à  http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/incb-bc.nsf/fr/ct01767f.html (visionné le 6 février 2005);
 

CHIPMAN, Julian, "Globalization and the Conspiracy Provisions",  in R. S. Khemani & W. T. Stanbury, eds., Canadian Competition Law and Policy at the Centenary, Halifax: The Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1991, xxvi, 667 p., Chapter 8, pp. 195-203, ISBN: 0886451353; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General: KE 1639 .C324 1991;
 

CHIPMAN, Warwick, "A Note on Combinations in Restraint of Trade", (1923) 1 Canadian Bar Review 236-242; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals, KE 365 .A2 C344;
 

COHEN, Maxwell,  "The MacQuarrie Report and the Reform of Combines Legislation - The Background, Main Features and Problems", (1952) 30 Canadian Bar Review 551-566; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals, KE 365 .A2 C344;

"Two important suggestions in the report were rejected by the government.  It refused to change the language of section 29 on the reduction and removal of customs duties, and left the expression 'at the expense of the public', instead of the report's porposed 'public interest'.  Obviously, the limitations on a court or administrator are far greater under this older test.  The suggested absorption of sections 498 and 498A of the Criminal Code into the Act was not accepted also, and these provisions remain as parallel offences in the Criminal Code.  There is something to be said for this decision.  Sections 498 and 498A may have a minor rôle to play in providing reasonably direct machinery, on a local level, in dealing with not too complex trade restraint situations.  Moreover, section 2 of the Combines Act deals with one or two types of business activity not mentioned in sections 498 and 498A, while sections 498 and 498A deal with insurance, as well as rebates, discounts and loss leaders possibly not covered by section 2.  What is lost by overlapping and uncertainty may be gained by additional and decentralized machinery; but there can be no serious expectation of effective policing at the provincial level.  The attorneys general of the provinces and their staffs are simply not geared for the complex studies required in such cases." (p. 562)

___________"Towards Reconsideration in Anti-Combines Law and Policy", (1963) 9 McGill Law Journal 81-101;

"The consequences of the McQuarrie committee's study were, of course, to amend the law by rendering illegal resale price maintenance, and perhaps more important its 1952 recommendations led to the division of the work of the Commissioner into two parts. There was now established a Restrictive Trade Practices Commission that would hear and determine the facts of alleged infringements of the Act and draft reports outlining the facts and its evaluation of them while a newly established office of Director of Investigation and Research would conduct all the preliminary enquiries and prepare statements of evidence to go before the Commission. One of the objectives, perhaps the most important one in this new division of labour, was to prevent the policeman and the quasi-judge from being one and the same official which, to a large extent, was the case theretofore." (p. 89; notes omitted)

COMPETITION BUREAU / BUREAU DE LA CONCURRENCE, web site at http://cb-bc.gc.ca/epic/internet/incb-bc.nsf/en/home (accessed on 6 February 2005);

"Conspiracies
The conspiracy provisions, section 45, 46 and 48 of the Competition Act prohibit agreements between two or more persons to prevent or unduly lessen competition or to unreasonably enhance the price of a product. Agreements between competitors to fix prices, to allocate customers or geographic markets, or to restrict production of a product by setting quotas among competitors or other means are considered to be "hard-core" cartel activities. Anti-competitive agreements harm both consumers and businesses, and enforcing the conspiracy provisions is an important priority for the Bureau. Much of the Bureau's work in this area involves investigating and prosecuting international cartels, a crucial activity for competition agencies around the world." (source:  http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/internet/index.cfm?itemID=119&lg=e ,accessed on 24 June 2005)

------

"Complot
Les dispositions sur les complots de la Loi sur la concurrence interdisent les accords entre deux personnes ou plus en vue d'empêcher ou réduire indûment la concurrence ou augmenter déraisonnablement le prix d'un produit. Les accords entre concurrents en vue de fixer les prix, se répartir les clients ou les marchés géographiques, ou limiter la production d'un produit en fixant des quotas entre concurrents ou par d'autres moyens sont considérés comme des « ententes injustifiables » ou des
« cartels patents » qui n'offrent à la société aucun avantage compensateur. Les accords anticoncurrentiels nuisent tant aux consommateurs qu'aux entreprises, aussi la mise en application des dispositions sur les complots est?elle une importante priorité du Bureau. Une grande partie du travail qu'accomplit le Bureau dans ce domaine consiste à faire enquête sur des cartels internationaux et à entamer des poursuites en conséquence; c'est également là une activité cruciale pour les organismes antitrust du monde entier." (source:  http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/internet/index.cfm?itemID=119&lg=f, visionné le 24 juin 2005)
 

CRAMPTON, Paul S. and Lori Cornwall, "Cooperation Between Competitors Under the Canadian Competition Act", (1997) 18 Canadian Competition Record 54-85; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 1632 .C34  Location, FTX Periodicals;
 

CRAMPTON, Paul S.  and Joel T. Kissack, "Recent Developments in Conspiracy Law and Enforcement: New Risks and Opportunities", (1992-93) 38 McGill Law Journal 569-619;
 

DUNLOP, Bruce, David McQueen, 1926-,  and Michael Trebilcock, 1941-, Canadian Competition Policy: A Legal and Economic Analysis, Toronto: Canada Law Book Inc., 1987, xvii, 337 p., ISBN:  0888040482; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF1609 D86;.
 

ECONOMIC COUNCIL OF CANADA, Interim Report on Competition Policy, Ottawa: Queen's Printer, 1969, xi, 244 p.; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General, KE 1649 .A215 1969; also available in French/aussi disponible en français: Conseil économique du Canada, Rapport provisoire sur la politique de concurrence, [Ottawa : Imprimeur de la Reine], 1969, xiii, 269 p., copie à l'Université d'Ottawa, FTX General, KE 1639 .A2C6 1969;

"Criminal Offences

    It will be recalled that we have proposed the following five offences for essentially per se treatment under criminal law:

(1) collusive arrangements between competitors to fix prices;
(2) collusive arrangements between competitors to allocate markets;
(3) collusive arrangements between competitors to prevent entry into markets of new competitors or the expamsion of existing competitors;
(4) resale price maintenance; and
(5) misleading advertising." (p. 189)
 

FACEY, Brian A., and Dany H. Assaf, "Innovation, growth and prosperity: a framework for amending Canada's conspiracy laws", (Winter 2001-2002) 20(4) Canadian Competition Record 61-76; copy at the Library of Parliament, article A023666, classification HDZ2907 C36; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 1632 .C34  Location, FTX Periodicals;
 

FAMULA, Paul-François, "Section 45 of the Competition Act: Partial Rule of Reason or Partially Reasonable Rule?", (1999) 62(1) Saskatchewan Law Review 121-171;

"The purpose of this paper is to examine the evolution of s. 45 of the Competition Act, the criminal conspiracy provision prohibiting agrements that have the effect of unduly lesening competition.  Although this provision has remained largely unchanged since its introduction, judicial interpretation has brought a regime of complex economic analysis to the subject." (p. 121; one note omitted)

FATOUROS, A.A., "Developments in Anti-Combines Administration", (1964-66) 2 University of British Columbia Law Review 71-88;
 

FELTHAM, Ivan R., "Restrictive Trade Practices and Agreements" in Law Society of Upper Canada, Current Problems in the Law of Contracts, Toronto: Richard De Boo, 1975, 521 p., at pp. 449-486 (series; Special lectures of the Law Society of Upper Canada; 1975); copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General, KE 361 .O5A45 1975;
 

FLAVELL, C.J. Micahel, 1940-, and Christopher J. Kent, The Canadian Competition Law Handbook, Scarborough (Ontario): Carswell Professional Publishing, 1997,  xix, 560 p., see in particular, "The Section 45 and 49 Offences", at pp. 131-142, ISBN: 0459254634; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF 1650 ZA2 F53 1997;

"[Partial Table of Contents]

Preface...v
Table of Cases...xv
1. INTRODUCTION AND HISTORY...3
2. CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS AND ISSUES...13
3. THE SCOPE OF THE ACT...21
4. PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION AND INQUIRY...29
5. REVIEWABLE MATTERS: THE CIVIL JURISDICTION
    OF THE COMPETITION TRIBUNAL...43
6. CRIMINAL LAW OFFENCES...121
7. PRIVATE RECOURSES...185
8. CONCLUSION...213
Appendixes...199
Index...555 (pp. vii-xiii)"

GOLDENBERG, H. Carl, Case and Comment, "Criminal Responsibility of Corporations -- Conspiracy in Restraint of Trade -- Rules of Evidence", (1949) 27 Canadian Bar Review 461-465;
 

GOLDMAN, Calvin S. and John D. Bodrug, Competition Law of Canada, New York: Juris Publishing, 3 looseleaf volumes and one CD Rom, ISBN: 1578230969; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF1645 K35 1988; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Reserve, KE 1637.5 .C64;
 

GORECKI, Paul K. and W.T. Stanbury, The Objectives of Canadian Competition Policy 1888-1983, Montreal: The Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1984, xxviii, 236 p., ISBN: 0886450020; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General   KE 1639 .G658 1984;
 

GOSSE, Richard, 1924-, "How Much May Competition Be Lessened?" (1962) 36 Criminal Reports 28-32;
 

___________The Law on Competition in Canada, Toronto: Carswell, 1962, xvi, 357 p.; copy at the University of Ottawa,  FTX General   KE 1649 .G6 1962;
 

GOURLEY, Al, with the assistance of Huy Do, PeterCho and Viktor Hohots, firm of Macleod Dixon, Toronto, "A Report on Canada's Conspiracy Law [under the Competition Act]: 1889-2001 and Beyond",  Toronto: Macleod Dixon, August 2001, 47 plus Appendixes; available at  http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/pics/ct/gourleyrep.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2005); important contribution;

"In June 2001 the Commissioner of Competition ("Commissioner") retained the authors to consider, and report on, a proposal for amending section 45 of the Competition Act. We were asked to consider a “two-track” system for dealing with conspiracies, one track being civil and the other criminal. While we have been guided by our particular terms of reference, it should be noted that the Commissioner did not suggest that we recommend a two-track system.  Accordingly, our report
and recommendation is of our own making for which we are solely responsible." (p. 1)

GREENSPAN, Edward L. and Marc Rosenberg, with annotations by, Martin's Related Criminal Statutes, 2005-2006, Aurora (Ontario): Canada Law Book, 2005, 1440 p., ISSN: 0710-1805; note: published May of each year; note: contains the Competition Act with annotations;
 

HANSARD, Hazen, "Combines 'Criminal' Law and the Constitution", (1952) 30 Canadian Bar Review 566-578;
 

HENDERSON, Gordon F., "Recent Development in Competition Law: The Limits of the Federal Criminal Law Power" in Law Society of Upper Canada Special Lectures, The Constitution and the Future of Canada, Toronto: Richard De Boo, 1978, 300 p. at pp. 109-134; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General, KE 361 .O5A45 1978;
 

HOWARD, John L., "Combines Investigation Act: Analyzing and Defending a Conspiracy Case", 15 p., in Canadian competition law : materials prepared for a Continuing Legal Education seminar held in Vancouver,  B.C. on April 6, 1984 / course co-ordinator, Russell W. Lusk ; instructors, John L. Howard ... [et al.], Vancouver: Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia, 1984, 1 v. (various pagings), ISBN: 0865041555; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General, KE 1639.5 .C35 1984;
 

HUGHES, Patrick and Margaret Sanderson, "Conspiracy Law and Jurisprudence in Canada: Towards an Economic Approach", (April 1998) 13(1-2) Review of Industrial Organization 153-176; note: "Special Issue.  Canadian Competition Law after Ten Years of the Competition Act" (cover of periodical);
 

HUGHES, Randal T. and Michele J. Lawford, "Jurisdiction Issues in Prosecutions Under s. 45 of the Competition Act", in Donald B. Houston, ed., Papers of the Canadian Bar Association Annual Fall Conference on Competition Law -- 2000, [Yonkers, NY] : [Toronto] : Juris Publishing; Canadian Bar Association, c2001, xi, 775, 8, 14 p., at pp. 477-500 (Chapter 11), ISBN: 1578231035; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF 1609 A2 C36 2000;
 

INDUSTRY CANADA -- Strategis.gc.ca -- Canada's Business and Consumer Site,
    available at  http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/ (accessed on 2 July 2005);/
INDUSTRIE CANADA -- Strategis.gc.ca --Le site canadien des entreprises et des consommateurs,
    disponible à  http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/ (visionné le 2 Juillet 2005);/
 
 

JANDA, Richard and Daniel Martin Bellemare, "Canada's Prohibition Against Anti-Competitive Collusion.  The New Rapporchement with U.S. Law", (1992-93) 38 McGill Law Journal 620-678;
 

KAISER, Gordon E., "Criminal Prosecutions under the Competition Act" in Corporate Crime in Canada, Toronto: Law Society of Upper Canada,  Dept. of Education, 1988, 1 v. (various pagings), Chapter C, 70 p., and another 10 p. for references; note: "These materials were planned and organized by Gordon E. Kaiser ... for the program held in Toronto on Friday, December 2,1988."; copy at Ottawa University, FTX General: KE 8958 .Z85 C657 1988; title noted in my research but book not consulted; loose-leaf article missing from binder!;
 

KENNISH, Tim, "Conspiracy", 47 p., in Insight Information Inc., Competition Law: Compliance in an Agressive Marketplace, Toronto : Insight Press, c1993, 1 volume (various pagings), ISBN: 1550494015; notes: "This volume contains the papers delivered at an Insight seminar held on May 11, 1993", "Code: 593054".copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada;
 

KENNISH, Tim, and Thomas W. Ross, "Toward a New Canadian Approach to Agreements Between Competitors," (1997) 28 Canadian Business Law Journal 22-68; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 912 .C343  Location: FTX Periodicals;

"CONTENTS

I. Introduction...23
II. The Economics of Co-operation...25

1. The Social Costs of Co-operation among Competitors...26
2. The Benefits of Co-operation...27
3. Toward the Ideal Law on Horizontal Agreements...30

III. The Current Canadian Law on Horizontal Agreements...32

1. Section 45...32
2. Canadian Conspiracy Law Following PANS...33

(a) Undueness Standard...34
(b) Essential Criminal Character Section 45...35
(c) Steps in Legal Analysis...36
(d) Conclusions Relative to Horizontal Agreements...38

3. Exceptions and Exemptions...38

(a) Subsection 45(3) Exceptions...38
(b) Export Agreements...40
(c) Specialization Agreements...40
(d) Joint Venture Exception...41

4. Civil Provisions...42

(a) Mergers...42
(b) Joint Dominance...43

5. Choice of Enforcement Options...43
6. Differing Consequences of Criminal vs. Civil Treatment...44
7. Possible Proceedings under Section 61...45

IV. The Treatment of Strategic Alliances...47

1. Character of these Arrangements...47
2. Strategic Alliances Bulletin...49
3. Competition Law Treatment...50

V. Proposals for Change...53

1. Without Legislative Reform...53
2. Proposals for Legislative Reform...55

(a) Proposal 1: Naked vs. Ancillary Restraints...55
(b) Proposal 2: Secret vs. Public Agreements...59
(c) Proposal 3: Exemptions for Mergers...62

3. Draft of Proposed Revisions...63

(a) Proposed New Criminal Provisions (Section 45)...64
(b) Proposed New Civil Reviewable Practice Provision (new Section 79A)...65

4. Enforcement Guidelines...66

VI. Conclusions...68" (pp. 22-23)

KWINTER, Robert E. and Kikelomo Lawal, "Canadian Conspiracy Law: Current and Prospective Applications in the Civil Context", Insight Conference: Competition Law Compliance, Marriott Bloor Yorkville -- Toronto, May 26-27, 2004, 9 p.; note: from the firm BLAKE, CASSELS & GRAYDON LLP, Toronto;
 

LALONDE, Marc, La législation canadienne sur les coalitions et les complots pour restreindre le commerce, thèse M.A., Université de Montréal, 1955, v, 250 p.; copie à la Bibliothèque de droit, Université de Montréal, AZBD U54t 1955 v.002 ex. 2; titre noté dans mes recherches mais thèse non consultée;
 

LEPKEY, Gabriel, and Elizabeth Galligan, eds., Législation et politique canadiennes en matière de concurrence : la bibliographie d'un centenaire, 1889-1989 = Canadian competition law and policy : a centennial bibliography, 1889-1989 / [Gabriel Lepkey avec l'aide d'Elizabeth Galligan], [Ottawa] : Bureau de la politique de concurrence, c1990, 252 p., see "Conspiracy/Complot" at pp. 79-86 (83 references) and "Constitutional Issues/Questions constitutionnles" at pp. 86-90, ISBN: 0662575717; copies at the University of Ottawa,  FTX Reference KE 1631 .L457 1990, and  MRT General  KE 1631 .L457 1990;
 

LOW, D. Martin and Omar Wakil, from the firm McMillan Binch LLP, Toronto, "Cartels / Criminal Enforcement: Canadian Developments", 23 p.; note: part of the ABA Section of Antitrust Law 2004 Fall Forum; available at
Forumhttp://www.mcmillanbinch.com/Upload/Publication/Cartels_Criminal%20Enforcement_%20Canadiian%20Developments_Low_Wakil_Fall%202004.pdf
(accessed on 25 January 2005); see also http://www.mcbinch.com/Cartels.html (accessed on 1 July 2005);
 

LUSK, Russell W., "Conspiracy: From What Evidence Is It Appropriate To Find An Agreement?", in R. S. Khemani & W. T. Stanbury, eds., Canadian Competition Law and Policy at the Centenary, Halifax: The Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1991, xxvi, 667 p., Chapter 7, pp. 149-194, ISBN: 0886451353; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General: KE 1639 .C324 1991;
 

MACDONALD, Bruce C., "Criminality and the Canadian Anti-Combines Laws", (1965) 9 Alberta Law Review 69-95; copy at the University of Ottawa, KEA 4 .L23  Location, FTX Periodicals;
 

MacDONALD, T.D., "Canadian Anti-Combines Legislation”, (1955) 13 University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 4-16;
 

McCARTHY TÉTRAULT, “Proposed Amendments to Section 45 of the Competition Act", August 2001, 36 p.; available at  tp://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/200/301/ic/cb-bc/proposed_amend_section_45-e/tetrault.pdf (accessed on 22 June 2005); important contribution;

"In fact, sections 45.1, 79(7), 90 and 98 of the Act confirm that section 45 could apply to a merger, a joint venture, a specialization agreement and joint dominance resulting from an agreement; the Information Bulletin on Strategic Alliances also confirms that section 45 applies to strategic alliances. (Industry Canada, Director of Investigation and Research, Information Bulletin on Strategic Alliances (Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada, 1995) at section 3.2." (p. 3, note 11)

McCRACKEN, K. Wayne, "'Conspiracy' and the Competition Act. Certain Questions", (1972) 22 University of Toronto Law Journal 60-66;
 

McDONALD, Bruce C., "Constitutional Aspects of Canadian Anti-Combines Law Enforcement", (1969) 47 Canadian Bar Review 161-240; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals, KE 365 .A2 C344;
 

McFETRIDGE, Donald G., "Horizontal Agreements as Reviewable Practices", Canadian Bar Association Annual Fall Conference on Competition Law, October 2002; available at  http://http-server.carleton.ca/~dmcfet/courses/Section25.PDF (accessed on 26 June 2005);
 

McFETRIDGE, Donald G. and Stanley Wong, "Agreements to Lessen Competition After Atlantic Sugar", (1980-81) 5 Canadian Business Law Journal 329-345; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 912 .C343  Location: FTX Periodicals;
 

___________"More on Atlantic Sugar: A Reply", (1981-82) 6 Canadian Business Law Journal 373-378; in reply to ENGELHART, supra; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 912 .C343  Location: FTX Periodicals;
 

McKEOWN, William P., "How the Conspiracy Provisions of the New Competition Law Affect the Professions and Services", (1977-78) 2 Canadian Business Law Journal 4-33; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 912 .C343  Location: FTX Periodicals;
 

McMILLAN BINCH MENDELSOHN, web site, available at  http://www.mcbinch.com/Cartels.html (accessed on 1 July 2005);

MOORE, Lynn, "Paper giants fined $37.5M in price-fixing bid.  Judge orders Domtar, Cascades, Unisource to fire or demote executives involved in scheme", The Ottawa Citizen, 10 January 2006, p. D1 and D 4; title at p. D4 is "Paper: Pleas keep details private"; decision of 9 January 2006 by Ontario Superior Court Judge David Watt; guilty pleas to two counts of conspiracy to lessen competition;
 

NEYLAN, Shawsn, and Michael Mahoney, from the Firm STIKEMAN ELLIOTT LLP, "It's not too tough for the Crown to win: the prosecutorial track record is not a basis for amending section 45 of the Competition Act", (Spring 2004) 21(4) Canadian Competition Policy 99-108; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 1632 .C34  Location, FTX Periodicals;
 

NOZICK, Robert S., The 2004 Annotated Competition Act, Toronto: Carswell/Thomson, 2003, xliv, 748 p.; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF1650 ZA2 C36; notes: biennal publication since 1997-; copy at the University of Ottawa, KEM 4 .M345  Location, FTX Periodicals;
 

___________"Anticompetitive Agreements Under the Combines Investigation Act: An Evaluation", (1984-85) 14 Manitoba Law Journal 379-418; copy at the University of Ottawa, KEM 4 .M345  Location FTX Periodicals;
 

ORMEROD, D.C., editor and A.J. Roberts, compiled by, Global Digest, Cases, "Co-Conspirators Exception to Hearsay Rule -- Canada.  R. v Mapara [2005] SCC 23", [August 2003] The Criminal Law Review669-671;
 

OSLER, HOSKINS & HARCOURT, Competition & Antitrust, available at  http://www.osler.com/expertise_antitrust.aspx?id=8761 (accessed on 26 June 2005);
 

"Practice Note: Conspiracy to lessen or prevent competition", (1956) 22 Criminal Reports 205 (1 paragraph only);
 

"Practice Note: Acts in restraint of trade", (1949) 8 Criminal Reports 67 (1 paragraph only);
 

"Practice Note: Combines", (1954) 19 Criminal Reports 2 (1 paragraph only);
 

"Practice Note: Combines", (1962) 36 Criminal Reports 97 (1 paragraph only);
 

"Practice Note: Combines (resale price maintenance)", (1957) 25 Criminal Reports 201 (1 paragraph only);
 

Public Policy Forum (PPF) -- National Consultation on Proposed Amendments to the Competition Act
(http://www.ppforum.ca/competitionact/index.html) /
Forum des politiques publiques -- Consultation nationale au sujet des modifications proposées à la Loi sur la concurrence
( http://www.ppforum.ca/competitionact/index_f.html)
 

QUINN, M Nicholson, C. Hersh and P. Watson, "Reforming Canada's Conspiracy Laws: Towards a Workable Proposal", Presented at the 2003 Competition Invitational Forum - Competition Reform - Again, The Discussion Paper and Bill C-249, Toronto, Ontario, November 17, 2003; title noted in my research but article not consulted;
 

RESCHENTHALER, G.B. and W.T. (William T.) Stanbury, "Recent Conspiracy Decisions in Canada: New Legislation Needed", (1981) 26 Antitrust Bulletin 839-869; copy at the University of Ottawa, HD 2795 .A58  Location FTX Periodicals;
 

ROBERTS, R.J. (R. Jack), 1942-, Comment, "The Death of Competition Policy: Monopoly, Mergy and Regina v. K.C. Irving Ltd.", (1977) 16 University of Western Ontario Law Review 215-226; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals, KEO 180 .W38;
 

____________Roberts on competition/antitrust : Canada and the United States, 2nd ed., Toronto : Butterworths, c1992, xlii, 509 p., and see in particular "Conspiracy or Agreement to Lessen Competition", xlii, 509 p., at pp. 57-105, ISBN: 0409808903 (series; Canadian legal textbook series), ISBN: 0409808903; note: First ed. published under title: Anticombines and antitrust; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Reserve: KE 1639 .R62 1992;
 

ROSS, Stephen F., "The evolving tort of conspiracy to restrain trade under Canadian common law", (June 1996) 75 Canadian Bar Review 193-220; copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 365 .A2 C344  Location: FTX Periodicals;
 

ROSS, Thomas R., "Proposals for a New Canadian Competition Law on Conspiracy" (1991) 36 Antitrust Bulletin 851-882; copy at the University of Ottawa, HD 2795 .A58  Location FTX Periodicals;
 

RUBY, Clayton, 1942-, Jill Copeland, Breese Davies, Delmar Doucette and Richard Litkoski, Sentencing, 6th ed., Markham (Ontario): LexisNexis Butterworths, 2004, lxix, 958 p., ISBN: 0433443162; see: "Conspiracies" under the Competition Act, at pp. 889-890; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF9685 R82 2004;
 

RUSSELL, R.S., Adam F. Funaki, and D.D. Akman, (firm of BORDEN LADNER GERVAIS LLP), "Legislative Framework for Amending section 45 of the Competition Act", 11 April 2001; available at  http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/pics/ct/russellrep2.pdf (accessed on 22 June 2005); important contribution;
 

SKEOCH, L.A., edited and with commentaries by., Restrictive Trade Practices in Canada, Selected Readings, Toronto/Montreal: McClelland & Stewart, 1966, xi, 354, [2] p.;

"Contents

PART ONE: THE HISTORY AND INTERPRETATION OF THE COMBINES LEGISLATION

I. THE HISTORY OF THE LEGISLATION
- Introduction, 2
- Historical Development of the Legislation:

-The Background, 1889-1951 -- Report of the Committee to Study Combines Legislation, 6
- The Amendments of 1951-52 and 1960 -- L.A. Skeoch, 15

II. LEGISLATIVE INTENT
- Introduction, 20
- Parliamentary Debates:

- Official Report of Debates in the House of Commons, 1909-10, 23
- Official Report of Debates in the House of Commons, 1923, 30

III. JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION
- Introduction, 31
- Free Competition and the Public Interest -- S.F. Sommerfeld, 39
- Notes on Jurisprudence Relating to Canadian Anti-Combines Legislation -- J.J. Quinlan, 46
- Canadian Anti-Combines Legislation: 'Unduly' and 'Public Detriment' -- J.J. Quinlan, 67
- The Queen v. Canadian Breweries Limited -- Judgment of Chief Justice McRuer, 76
 

PART TWO: REVIEW OF THE COMBINES REPORTS
- Introduction, 90
- Summary of Reports made by the Registrar, the Commissioner, or by Special Commissioners, 97
- Summary of Reports made by the Restrictive Trade Practices Commission, 117
- Proceedings under Section 15 of the Combines Investigation Act, 146
- Table of Cases, 150
 

PART THREE: SELECTED SPECIAL TOPICS

I. RESALE PRICE MAINTENANCE
- Introduction, 156
- The Abolition of Resale Price Maintenance: Some notes on Canadian Experience -- L.A. Skeoch, 156
 

II. PATENTS AND RESTRICTIVE PRACTICES
- Introduction, 167
- Notes on 'Patents in Relation to Monopoly' -- I.M. MacKeigan, 170
- Patent Restraints and Remedial Measures -- Thurman Arnold, 186
- Tthe Relation of Patents to Cartels and Combines -- Report of Commissioner, Combines Investigation Act, 210
- Looking at TV Imports -- 'M.F.', 222

III. MERGERS
- Introduction, 226
- Consololidations in Canadian Industry, 1900-1948 -- J.C. Weldon, 228
 

APPENDIX
APPENDIX A: Text of the More Important Laws Dealing with Restraint of Trade in Canada, 281
APPENDIX B: Suggestions for Further Reading, 347
Note on the Editor, 355
The Contributors, 356" (pp. v-vi)
 

STANBURY, W.T. (William T.), "Amendments to the Conspiracy Provisions in Bill C-29",  32 p., in Canadian competition law : materials prepared for a Continuing Legal Education seminar held in Vancouver,  B.C. on April 6, 1984 / course co-ordinator, Russell W. Lusk ; instructors, John L. Howard ... [et al.], Vancouver: Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia, 1984, 1 v. (various pagings), ISBN: 0865041555; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General, KE 1639.5 .C35 1984;
 

___________"Legislation to Control Agreements in Restraint of Trade in Canada: Review of the Historical Record and Proposals for Reform” in R. S. Khemani & W. T. Stanbury, eds., Canadian Competition Law and Policy at the Centenary, Halifax: The Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1991, xxvi, 667 p., Chapter 6, pp. 61-148, ISBN: 0886451353; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General: KE 1639 .C324 1991; note: Companion volume to: Historical perspectives on Canadian competition policy;
 

___________"Public Policy Towards Individuals Involved in Competition-Law Offences in Canada", in Frank Pearce and Laureen Snider, Corporate Crime: Contemporary Debates, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1995, xiii, 426 p., at pp. 214-242, ISBN: 0802006671 and 0802076211 (pbk.); copy at the Library of Parliament, Br. B HV 6768 C67;
 

__________"Reforming the Conspiracy Provisions of the Competition Act: An Analysis of Bill C-472 and New Proposals”, (Spring/Summer 2000) 20(1) Canadian Competition Record 63-86; copy at the University of Ottawa, copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 1632 .C34  Location, FTX Periodicals;
 

___________Comments and Analysis, "A Review of Conspiracy Cases in Canada, 1965/66 to1987/88", (March 1989) 10(1) Canadian Competition Policy Record 33-49; copy at the University of Ottawa, copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 1632 .C34  Location, FTX Periodicals;
 

STANBURY, W.T. (William T.), M.T. MacCrimon,  and G.B. Reschenthaler, "The Enforceability of Section 32 of the Combines Investigation Act", 37 p., in Canadian competition law : materials prepared for a Continuing Legal Education seminar held in Vancouver,  B.C. on April 6, 1984 / course co-ordinator, Russell W. Lusk ; instructors, John L. Howard ... [et al.], Vancouver: Continuing Legal Education Society of British Columbia, 1984, 1 v. (various pagings), ISBN: 0865041555; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX General, KE 1639.5 .C35 1984;
 

STANBURY, W.T. (William T.) and G.B. Reschenthaler, "Oligopoly and Conscious Parallelism: Theory, Policy and the Canadian Cases", (1977) 15 Osgoode Hall Law Journal 617-700;
 

STIKEMAN ELLIOTT, Competition Act and commentary [year], Markham, Ont. : Butterworths, c1999- (annual), ISSN:  1491-249X; latest issue:  2005 edition, published by LexisNexis Canada, 568 p., ISBN: 0433448164; title noted in my research but book not consulted;
 

___________"The Competitor", publication available at http://www.stikeman.com/en/publications/look/news_issues.cfm?ID=2 (accessed on 19 June 2005);
 

SUPREME COURT OF CANADA / COUR SUPRÊME DU CANADA
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   - Aetna Insurance Co. v. The Queen, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 731;
- Atlantic Sugar et al. v. Attorney General of Canada, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 644-678;
- Belyea v. The King, [1932] S.C.R. 279-297, 1932 CanLII 1 (S.C.C.)1932 CanLII 1 (S.C.C.) disponible à http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1932/1932scc10000.html;
- Atlantic Sugar Refineries Co. v. A.G. Can., [1980] 2 S.C.R. 644;
- R. v. Nova Scotia Pharmaceutical Society, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 606 (http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1992/vol2/index.html);
 

TREBILCOCK, Michael J., 1941-, "The Supreme Court and Strengthening the Conditions for Effective Competition in the Canadian Economy" (2000) 80 Canadian Bar Review 542-604, see the "Criminal Prohibition Against Conspiracies", at pp. 592-603,
 

TREBILCOCK, Michael J., 1941-, Ralph A. Winter, Paul Collins, and Edward Iacobucci, The Law and Economics of Canadian Competition Policy, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002, vii, 804 p., see Chapter 3, "Multi-Firm Conduct: Horizontal Agreements", at pp. 86-130, ISBN: 0802035574 and 0802086128 (pbk.); copy at the Library of Parliament, Br. B. KE 1639 L39;

"Contents

Acknowledgments...vii

1. Canadian Competition Policy in Historical Perspective...3
2. Basic Economic Concepts in Competition Policy...37
3. Multi-Firm Conduct: Horizontal Agreements...86
4. The Merger Review Process...131
5. Predatory Pricing and Price Discrimination...288
6. Vertical Restraints: Intrabrand Competition...373
7. Vertical Restraints: Interbrand Competition...439
8. Abuse of Dominance...504
9. Competition Policy and Intellectual Property Rights...573
10. Competition Policy and Trade Policy...640
11. Competition Policy and Regulated Industries...690
12.  Enforcement...736

Subject Index...783
Table of Cases...793" (p. v)

TUCKER, Eric, "That Indefinite Area of Toleration: Criminal Conspiracy and Trade Unions in Ontario, 1837-77",  (1991) 27 Labour/Le Travail 15-54, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1578259, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1578259;

WARNER, Presley L. and Michael J. Trebilcock, "Rethinking Price-Fixing Law," (1992-93) 38 McGill Law Journal  679-723;

"We believe that the way around the impasse is to redefme the focus of a criminal prohibition. A criminal prohibition should target only naked price-fixing arrangements. What are the characteristics of such arrangements? Obviously, naked price-fixing arrangements lessen competition. However, a second distinguishing characteristic of such arrangements is that they are generally covert. As Warren-Boulton notes in the U.S. context:

[T]he overwhelming number of price-fixing, bid-rigging, and market allocation cases are brought against relatively small, owner-managed firms with limited assets that might be exposed to damage claims. These firms tend to operate in local or regional markets where concentration and barriers to entry are low. In such markets, implicit collusion or dominant firm behaviour is neither likely nor treatable by structural policies. In the absence of substantial barriers to entry, customers and/or potential competitors would simply enter if they knew that supra- competitive prices were being charged. Most bid-rigging and price-fixing cases are thus essentially simple frauds, where customers or suppliers are deceived into believing that their suppliers or customers are competing with each other.²¹³

------
²¹³Supra note 63 at 346" (p. 716; the reference is to F.R. Warren-Boulton, "Implications of U.S. Experience with Horizontal Mergers and Takeovers for Canadian Competition Policy" in Mathewson, Trebilcock & Walker, eds., The Law and Economics of Competition Policy, Vancouver: Fraser Institute, 1990)

___________"Fixing Price-Fixing Laws", (1996) 17 Canadian Competition Record 48-58; note: "The following article is a revised condensed version of an article entitled 'Rethinking Price-Fixing Law' that appeared in (1993) 38 McGill L.J. 679" (p. 48) copy at the University of Ottawa, KE 1632 .C34  Location, FTX Periodicals;
 

WETSTON, Howard I, "Canadian Competition Law: Current Issues in Conspiracy Law and Enforcement" in Commercial crime and commercial law = Le droit des affaires face au droit pénal, Cowansville (Quebec) : Éditions Y. Blais, 1991, xvi, 467 p., at pp. 33-50, (series; Meredith Memorial Lectures; 1990), ISBN: 2890737640; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF385 ZA2 W35 1990;

"Synopsis

1. Introduction...35
2. Economic Aspects of Collusion...36

2.1 The Effects of Collusion...36
2.2 Factors That Facilitate Collusion...38
2.3 Beneficial Co-operation Between Competitors...40

3. Issues in the Application of the Canadian Law...41

3.1 Overview of provisions...4.1
3.2 Investigative Issues...43
3.3 Charter and Constitutional Litigation...44
3.4 Penalties...45
3.5 Enforcement Approach...47
3.6 Private Litigation...48
3.7 Future Directions...49

4. Conclusion...50" (p. 33)

____________"Canadian competion law: current issues in conspiracy law and enforcement: notes for an address", [Ottawa]: Consumer and Corporate Affairs Canada, 1990, 15 p.; also available in French / aussi disponible: Le droit de la concurrence au Canada: les questions de l'heure concernant le droit en matière de complots et son application: notes pour une allocution / prononcée par Howard I. Weston, Directeur des enquêtes et recherches, Bureaude la politique de concurrence, Consommantion et corporation Canada, Meredith Memorial Lectures, Université McGill, Montréal, le 30 novembre 1990, [Ottawa] Consommation et corporations Canada, 1990, 18 p., notes: En tête du titre: Discours, D-00121/90-29; copie à l'Université d'Ottawa,
 

WISE, Michael, "Review of Competion Law and Policy in Canada", (2003) 5(1) OECD Journal of Competition and Policy 47-110, includes bibliography; copy at the Library of Parliament; abstract available at http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/oecd/15607771/2003/00000005/00000001/2403211ec003;jsessionid=d99fba1b2b1t.henrietta (accessed on 6 January 2006);

"THE COMPETITION POLICY TOOLKIT

    General competition laws usually address the problems of monopoly power in three formal settings: relationships and agreements among otherwise independent firms, actions by a single firm, and structural combinations of independent firms.  The first category, agreements, is often subdivided for analytic purposes into two groups: 'horizontal' agreements among firms that do the same things, and 'vertical' agreements among firms at different stages of production or distribution.  The second category is termed 'monopolisation' in some laws, and 'abuse of dominant position in others; the legal systems that use different labels have developed somewhat different approaches to the problem of single-firm economic power.  The third category, often called 'mergers' or 'concentrations', usually includes other kinds of structural combination, such as share or asset acquisitions, joint ventures, cross-shareholdings and interlocking directorates.

    Agreements may permit the group of firms acting together to achieve some of the attributes of monopoly, of raising prices, limiting output, and preventing entry or innovation.  The most troublesome horizontal agreements are those that prevent rivalry about the fundamental dynamics of market competition, price and output.  Most contemporary competition laws treat naked agreements to fix prices, limit output, rig bids, or divide markets very harshly.  To enforce such agreements, competitors may also agree on tactics to prevent new competition or to discipline firms that do not go along; thus, the laws also try to prevent and punish boycotts.  Horizontal co-operation on other issues, such as product standards, research, and quality, may also affect competition, but whether the effect is positive or negative can depend on market conditions.  Thus, most laws deal with these other kinds of agreement by assessing a larger range of possible benefits and harms, or by trying to design detailed rules to identify and exempt beneficial conduct.

    Vertical agreements try to control aspects of distribution. The reasons for concern are the same--that the agrements might lead to increased prices, lower quantity (or poorer quality), or prevention of entry and innovation.  Because the competitive effects of vertical agreements can be more complex than those of horizontal agreements, the legal treatment of different kinds of vertical agreements varies even more than horizontal agreements.  One basic type of agreement is resale price maintenance: vertical agreements can control minimum, or maximum, prices.  In some settings, the result can be to curb market abuses by distributors.  In others, though, it can be to duplicate or enforce a horizontal cartel.  Agreements granting exclusive dealings rights or territories can encourage greater effort to sell the supplier's product, or they can protect distributors from competition or prevent entry by other suppliers. Depending on the circumstances, agreements about product combinations, such as requiring distributors to carry full lines or trying different products together, can either facilitate or discourage introductioon of new products." (p. 54)
 
 

National Defence Act, s. 2(1) -- defintion (b) of "criminal organization offence"; s. 2(1) -- defintion (d) of "terrorism offence"; par. 81(a) -- Offences related to mutiny; s. 128 -- Conspiracy; s. 196.11 -- definition (c) of  "secondary designated offence" « infraction secondaire"; 196.26(y) -- Meaning of "designated offence"
 

Military Rules of Evidence, C.R.C., c. 1049, section  46, "Conspirator's Evidence"; available at  http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/n-5/c.r.c.-c.1049/147651.html (accessed on 17 December 2004); also available in French / aussi disponible en français: Règles militaires de preuve, C.R.C., ch. 1049, article 46, "Preuve de conspiration", disponible à http://lois.justice.gc.ca/fr/N-5/C.R.C.-ch.1049/48189.html (visionné le 17 décembre 2004);

"Conspirator's Evidence
    46. (1) When two or more persons are alleged to have been parties to a common criminal plan or design, the words of one of them, apparently spoken or written as part of or in furtherance of the formation or carrying out of that  plan, are admissible as evidence against the others as well as against the speaker or writer.

    (2) Subsection (1) applies whether the charge alleges the conspiracy itself, or the commission of the offence planned, or the attempt to commit it, and whether an accused is charged singly, or jointly with the alleged co-conspirator whose words purport to incriminate them.

    (3) The probative value of evidence admitted under subsection (1) is a  matter for the court."

------

"Preuve de conspiration
    46. (1) Lorsque deux ou plusieurs personnes sont censées avoir été parties à un projet ou dessein criminel commun, les mots de l'une d'elles, apparemment prononcés ou écrits comme partie de ce projet ou comme élaboration ou exécution dudit projet, sont admissibles comme preuve contre les autres aussi bien que contre celle qui les a prononcés ou écrits.

    (2) Le paragraphe (1) s'applique, même si l'accusation allègue la conspiration elle-même, ou le fait que l'infraction projetée a été commise, ou  la tentative de la commettre, et même si le prévenu est accusé seul ou conjointement avec le coconspirateur présumé dont les mots tendent à les incriminer.

    (3) La valeur probante de la preuve présentée sous le régime du paragraphe (1) est une question qui relève de la compétence de la cour."
 

Conspiracy
128. Every person who conspires with any other person, whether or not that other person is subject to the Code of Service Discipline, to commit an offence under the Code of Service Discipline is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years or to less punishment.

Complot
128. Tout complot avec une autre personne, justiciable ou non du code de discipline militaire, en vue de commettre une infraction prévue par celui-ci constitue une infraction passible au maximum, sur déclaration de culpabilité, d'un emprisonnement de sept ans.

QUEEN’S REGULATIONS AND ORDERS FOR THE CANADIAN FORCES (regulations under the National Defence Act), see in volume II, Discipline, article 103.595, "Conspiracy", available at  http://www.dnd.ca/admfincs/subjects/qr_o/vol2/ch103_e.asp#103.595 (accessed on 17 December 2004); see also, supra, National Defence Act; also available in French / aussi disponible en français:ORDONNANCES ET RÈGLEMENTS ROYAUX APPLICABLES AUX FORCES CANADIENNES (en vertu de la Loi sur la défense nationale), voir le volume 2, Discipline, article 103.595, "Complot"; disponible à http://www.dnd.ca/admfincs/subjects/qr_o/vol2/ch103_f.asp#103.595 (visionné le 17 décembre 2004); voir aussi, supra, National Defence Act /Loi sur la défense nationale;

"NOTES

(A) To constitute the offence of conspiracy under the Code of Service Discipline, there must be a combination of two or more persons who have agreed and intend  to accomplish an unlawful purpose or by unlawful means some purpose not in itself  unlawful.

(B) The agreement in a conspiracy need not

(i) be in any particular form nor manifested in any formal words, or

(ii) expressly declare the means by which the conspiracy is to be accomplished or what part each conspirator is to play.

(C) The minds of the parties to the conspiracy must arrive at a common understanding to accomplish the object of the conspiracy.

(D) A conspiracy to commit an offence is a different and distinct offence from the offence which is the object of the conspiracy. While both conspiracy and the consummated offence which was its object may be charged and tried, it is
 preferable to avoid a multiplicity of charges and if it is thought necessary to lay a charge of conspiracy as well as a charge for the offence which was its object, they should be laid in the alternative.

(E) Section 128 of the National Defence Act will apply not only to the offences under sections 72 to 129 but also to offences under section 130 (see article 103.61 – Offences Against other Canadian Canadian Law) and section 132 (see article 103.615 – Offences Against Foreign Law) of the National Defence Act. In view of the minimum and maximum punishments which are mandatory or permissive under the other Canadian or foreign law, careful consideration should be given to these aspects before it is decided to lay a charge under section 130 or 132 rather than section 128."

--------------

"NOTES

(A) Pour constituer un complot visé par le code de discipline militaire, deux personnes ou plus doivent avoir convenues et doivent avoir l'intention d'accomplir un acte illégal, ou, par des  moyens illégaux, une fin qui n'est pas illégale en soi.

(B) Dans un complot, il n'est pas nécessaire que l'entente :

(i) prenne soit une forme particulière ou qu'elle soit exprimée en termes formels;

(ii) déclare soit expressément les moyens par lesquels le complot doit être exécuté ou encore quel rôle chacun des conspirateurs doit y jouer.

(C) Les esprits des parties au complot doivent s'entendre en vue de réaliser l'objet du complot.

(D) Comploter de commettre une infraction est une infraction différente et distincte de l'infraction qui fait l'objet du complot. Bien que le complot et l'infraction commise puissent tous deux faire l'objet d'actes d'accusation et être jugés, il est préférable d'éviter de multiplier les accusations, et si l'on croit nécessaire de porter une accusation à l'égard du complot de même qu'à l'égard de l'infraction qui en était l'objet, les deux accusations devraient être formulées sous forme d'accusations en alternative.

(E) L'article 128 de la Loi sur la défense nationale s'applique non seulement aux infractions visées par les articles 72 à 129, mais aussi aux infractions visées par l'article 130 (voir l'article103.61 – Infractions aux autres lois du Canada), et par l'article 132 (voir l'article 103.615 – Infractions aux lois de pays étrangers) de la Loi sur la défense nationale. Étant donné les peines  minimales et maximales qui sont obligatoires ou facultatives sous le régime de lois canadiennes ou de lois étrangères, on doit étudier soigneusement ces aspects avant de décider de porter une accusation en vertu de l'article 130 ou 132 plutôt qu'en vertu de l'article128."

D - Other Federal Statutes and Regulations / Autres lois fédérales et règlements

Provisions of the federal statutes (research done on Justice Canada -
Consolidated Statutes and Regulations of Canada - Curent to August 31, 2004)

- Air Travellers Security Charge Act, par. 62(1)(e) -- Offences for false or deceptive statement;
- Canada Elections Act, s. 480(2) -- Public meetings
- Canada Pension Plan, s. 41(4) -- Offence and punishment
- Canada Shipping Act, par. 247(1)(e) -- General offences against discipline
- Competition Act, s. 45 -- Conspiracy; s. 46 -- Foreign directives; s. 48 -- Conspiracy relating to professional sport; par. 83(1)(b) -- Foreign laws and directives;
- Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, defintion 2(1)(b) of "designated substance offence"; s. 3(1) -- Interpretation; s. 61 -- References to prior enactments
- Corrections and Conditional Release Act, subpar. 125(1)(e)(ii) -- Application; subpar. 125(1)(e)(ii.1) -- Application; Schedule I, s. 1(z.7) -- paragraph 465(1)(a) (conspiracy to commit murder);
- Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act, s. 4(1.1) -- conspiracy, attempt, etc.; s. 5(2.1) -- conspiracy, attempt, etc.; s. 6(1.1) -- conspiracy, attempt, etc.; s. 7(2.1) -- conspiracy, attempt, etc.;
- Divorce Act, s. 11(4) -- Definition of "Collusion"
- Employment Insurance Act, par. 106(4)(e) -- Offence
- Excise Tax Act, par. 327(1)(e) -- Offences
- Excise Act, 2001, par. 219(1)(e) -- Falsifying or destroying records; par. 230(1)(b) -- Property obtained from offences; par. 231(1)(b) -- Laundering proceeds of certain offences;
- Extradition Act, par. 46(2)(f) -- Restriction;
- Financial Administration Act par. 80(b) -- Offences and punishment
- Income Tax Act, par. 239(1)(e) -- Other offences and punishment
- Insurance Companies Act, Schedule -- Classes of Insurance, definition of "civil commotion insurance"
- National Defence Act, s. 2(1) -- defintion (b) of "criminal organization offence"; s. 2(1) -- defintion (d) of "terrorism offence"; par. 81(a) -- Offences related to mutiny; s. 128 -- Conspiracy; s. 196.11 -- definition (c) of  "secondary designated offence" « infraction secondaire"; 196.26(y) -- Meaning of "designated offence"
- Petroleum and Gas Revenue Tax, par. 40(1)(e) -- Offences;
- Security of Information Act, s. 23 -- Conspiracy, attempts, etc.
- Shipping Conferences Exemption Act, 1987, s. 4(4) -- Exemption re predatory practices; s. 5(1) -- Limitation
- Trade Unions Act, s. 29
- Youth Criminal Justice Act, Schedule, par. 1(y) -- paragraph 465(1)(a) (conspiracy to commit murder)
 

Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Police Enforcement) Regulations, SOR/97-234, registered 22 April 1997, as amended / Règlement sur l’exécution policière de la Loi réglementant certaines drogues et autres substances, DORS/97-234, enregistré le 22 avril 1997, tel que modifié

(a) is an active member of the police force;

(b) is acting in the course of the member’s responsibilities for the purposes of a particular investigation; and

(b) acts to assist the member in the course of the particular investigation; and

(c) engages in conduct that, but for the application of this section, would constitute a conspiracy to commit, being an accessory after the fact in relation to, or any counselling in relation to, an offence under subsection 4(2) or section 5, 6 or 7 of the Act."

E- Provincial Law / Droit provincial

LÉTOURNEAU, Gilles et Pierre Robert, Code de procédure pénale du Québec annoté, 6e édition, Montréal : Wilson et Lafleur, 2004, xiiv, 919 p., voir "La tentative et complot" à la p. 108, ISBN: 2891276442; copie à l'Université d'Ottawa, KEQ 1174 .A3117 L47 2004; note: droit pénal provincial;

    "Le Code de procédure pénale ne contient pas de dispositions réprimant la tentative et le complot.  La raison en est double. [...]

    Deuxièmement, le législateur ne voulait pas, compte tenu de la diversité des lois statutaires provinciales et de l'importance des variations que ces lois révèlent au niveau de la gravité des infractions, instaurer un régime automatique et universel de responsabilité pour les infractions hybrides et particulières que sont le complot et la tentative.  Cette réticence du législateur se comprend quand on s'arrête au stigma que la notion de complot emporte et au laxisme des règles de preuve qui entourent une telle accusation, surtout lorsque jumelée à une infraction substantive qui obéit à des normes d'admissibilité de preuve beaucoup plus strictes. [...]
 

    Sur un plan pratique et compte tenu de la philosophie qui prévaut en droit pénal, soit que ce droit est un instrument de dernier recours qui doit être utilisé avec modération, le législateur a préféré laisser aux lois sectorielles le soin d'identifier les infractions qui, à son avis, méritent de s'étendre au complot et à la tentative." (p. 108)

[Home -- Accueil]
[Main Page -- Criminal Law / Page principale -- droit pénal]