• Vancouver at night

Commercial Crime

The Charge

People charged with commercial crime are generally charged with Fraud over $5000 offences, pursuant to s. 380 of the Criminal Code. Commercial crime offences may includes offences contrary to the Bankruptcy Act, the British Columbia Securities Act or the British Columbia Insurance (Vehicle) Act. Over the years our firm has defended clients charged with bankruptcy fraud, counterfeiting and insurance fraud. Depending on the scale of the fraud, Crown counsel often seeks significant jail time for commercial crime offences. Often, there is a breach of trust element to commercial crime charges. When an employee or business partner is accused of using their position of trust to commit an offence, Crown will rely on s. 718 of the Criminal Code which deems breach of trust to be an “aggravating circumstance” which can increase the sentence of a person convicted of a commercial crime offence.

The Investigation

All cases are unique, but in the majority of commercial crime cases the suspect is confronted with an investigator working for the organization that claims to have been victimized. Typically, this is an official from the BC Securities Commission, the bank or the insurance company. Because this is not yet a police investigation, the suspect is not usually advised of their rights under the Charter to be able to immediately contact a lawyer or to remain silent. It is certainly not uncommon for people in this situation to be tempted to explain themselves and they often end up making some incriminating statements. We certainly advise anyone who has been confronted with an accusation of commercial crime to call our office for advice at the earliest opportunity possible.

A person accused of a commercial crime offence often faces the pressure of both a criminal charge and a civil action being taken by the Securities Commission, bank, insurance company or other body. It is certainly prudent to obtain legal advice from counsel that has experience defending these types of charges.

Recent Successes

R. vs. A.S. - Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Driving while prohibited.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with this charge which carries a mandatory one year driving prohibition upon conviction.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide Crown counsel with information that concluded our client was not at all responsible for the motor vehicle accident and persuaded Crown to proceed on the lesser offence of driving without aa valid license. Our client was sentenced to a fine and a 3 month driving prohibition.

R. vs. L.M. - Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Mischief Over $5000; Assault Police Officer.
Issue: Whether the sentence ought to emphasize punishment or rehabilitation in this matter where our client was alleged to have caused over $100,000 in damage to his building.
Result: Mr. Gauthier was able to provide Crown counsel with materials confirming the rehabilitative steps our client had taken for his mental health. The cRown stayed the assault police officer charge and, after hearing Mr. Gauthier's submissions, the Court granted our client a conditional discharge and placed him on probation. No jail.

R. vs. D.R. - Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings on the assault charge. Our client entered into a 12 month Peace Bond. No criminal record.

R. vs. B.Z. - Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

Charge: Assault (domestic).
Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to direct our client through, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with this prosecution.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to provide Crown counsel with information that allowed him to persuade Crown to enter a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. vs. M.C. - Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest for Crown to proceed with the prosecution of this offence which carries a 12 month mandatory minimum driving prohibition.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser offence of driving without a valid licence. Our client received a $500 fine and a 30 day driving prohibition.

R. vs. M.L. - Surrey Provincial Court

Charges: Sexual Interference.
Issue: Whether the Crown could prove that our client sexually interfered with his niece.
Result: After a 6 day trial, Mr. Johnson was able to persuade the trial judge that there was reasonable doubt as to the complainant's credibility and reliability. Not guilty. No jail. No criminal record.

R. vs. R.R. - Richmond Provincial Court

Charges: Theft Under $5000 (shoplifting).
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide Crown counsel with information that led Crown to resolve this matter with a Caution Letter. No charges were approved. No criminal record.

R. vs. B.R. - Vancouver Youth Court

Charges: Assault Causing Bodily Harm; Assault with a Weapon.
Issue: Whether our client was acting in self defence when he injured the complainant with a knife during an altercation.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to provide information to Crown counsel that resulted in Crown declining to approve any charges. No criminal record.

R. v. C.C. - Surrey provincial Court

Charges: Impaired Driving, Dangerous Driving Causing Death. Issues: Whether police breached our client's Charter rights during the investigation; whether the court would accept the Crown's sentencing submission.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that police breached our client's right against an unlawful seizure of his breath samples. This resulted in the Crown's inability to prove the Impaired Driving / Over .08 offences.  The Crown had originally been seeking up to 4.5 years jail, but sought a one year jail sentence on the Dangerous Driving Causing Death charge. After hearing Mr. Mines' submissions, the court found that 5 months was the appropriate sentence.

R. vs. B.S. - North Vancouver RCMP Investigation

.Charge: Uttering Threats.
Issue: Whether there was a public interest in proceeding with the proposed charge.
Result: After Mr. Johnson made  representations to the investing officer, police advised that no charges would be forwarded to Crown counsel. No criminal record.

R. vs. C.M. - Vancouver Provincial Court

Charge: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge, which carries a one year mandatory minimum driving prohibition upon conviction.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed on the lesser charge of driving without a valid drivers license. The court agreed with Mr. Mines' submissions and imposed a fine but did not impose any driving prohibition.

R. vs. N.A. - Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Driving While Prohibited.
Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to allow our client to plead to the lesser offence of driving without a valid driver's license. Rather than face a mandatory minimum 12 month driving prohibition, our client was sentenced to a fine. No driving prohibition.  

The Defence

Clients that contact us early in the investigation (before charges are forwarded to police) have the best chance of obtaining the best result – the chance of no charge being approved at all. In our many years of practicing criminal law, we’ve learned that many complainants are primarily interested in recovering their losses through civil means rather than pursuing criminal charges. In such cases – and even in cases where charges have been approved – our goal is to try and obtain a civil settlement which involves our client making civil restitution to the complainant in exchange for obtaining a release for any further civil liability.

In some cases, in the face of strong Crown evidence, we have no alternative but to go to trial to defend our client. Often, commercial crime cases involve complex issues in the law of evidence. We are well versed in the various laws that involve search warrants, production orders and the various Canada Evidence Act provisions involving the rules Crown must comply with when they want to introduce banking records, business records, or any other documentary evidence. Our experience allows us to develop arguments at trial which are aimed at protecting our clients’ rights to be treated to a fair trial as guaranteed by the Charter.

Start with a free consultation.

If you are being investigated by police or if you’ve been charged with a criminal or driving offence, don’t face the problem alone. Being accused of an offence is stressful. The prospects of a criminal record or jail sentence can be daunting. Even if you think there is no defence, we may be able to help. To schedule a free initial consultation with one of our Vancouver lawyers, contact us now.