Page 1

Jay Brecher (Contributor)

Halsbury's Laws of Canada - Athletics (2013 Reissue)
IV. CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITY

1. Criminal Offences
(1) General
HAT-28 Serious offences.
HAT-28 Serious offences. Participants in a variety of sporting activities have been convicted of
serious criminal offences. For example, where the victim and accused were both hockey players and
the victim died from a kick to the abdomen during a fight after a game, the accused was convicted
of manslaughter.1 A skier who collided with the victim while showing off, breaking both of the
victim's legs, was convicted of criminal negligence causing bodily harm.2
Coaches. Persons who coach children's and youth's sports teams are in a position of trust in relation
to the players. Thus, where such persons are convicted for sexual assault, the sentence imposed is
required to reflect the breach of such trust. In one case, a coach committed hundreds of sexual
assaults against two males, who were 14 and 15 years of age respectively when the assaults began.
In overturning a sentence of two years' imprisonment, the Alberta Court of Appeal noted that the
offences were "egregious", the accused's degree of guilt or moral blameworthiness was high and the
harm done to the victims was substantial. While the appropriate sentence would have been eight
years' imprisonment, the Court reduced the sentence to five years having regard to the fact that the
coach had undergone therapy and had not reoffended for 14 years.3
Spectators. Spectators of sporting events have also been found guilty of criminal offences, such as
uttering a threat to cause bodily harm to a hockey player4 and taking part in a riot following a
hockey game.5 With respect to the latter, dozens of sentencing decisions have been made arising
from a riot that occurred after the Vancouver Canucks lost game seven of the Stanley Cup playoffs.
The sentences imposed ranged from 16 months' imprisonment to a suspended sentence with two
years of probation. Custodial terms were imposed by way of conditional and intermittent sentences,
and lengthy periods of probation with significant numbers of Community Work Service hours were
also imposed.6 In one case, a sentence of custody was required where the accused had encouraged
the crowd and had participated in destroying a police vehicle. The accused was sentenced to 30
days' intermittent custody.7
Footnote(s)

Page 2

1 R. v. Smithers, [1977] S.C.J. No. 58, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 506 (S.C.C.). See also R. v. Jobidon,
[1991] S.C.J. No. 65, [1991] 2 S.C.R. 714 (S.C.C.), in which the accused was convicted of
manslaughter for a death resulting from a fist fight.
2 R. v. M.S., [1992] A.J. No. 193, 5 Alta. L.R. (3d) 29 (Alta. Prov. Ct.). The accused's
conduct was found to be a marked departure from the standard expected of a reasonably
prudent skier.
3 R. v. James, [2013] M.J. No. 48, 2013 MBCA 14 (Man. C.A.).
4 R. v. Richardson, [1995] N.B.J. No. 536, 170 N.B.R. (2d) 388 (N.B.Q.B.).
5 R. v. Berntt, [1997] B.C.J. No. 2301, 120 C.C.C. (3d) 344 (B.C.C.A.). See also Halsbury's
Laws of Canada: Criminal Offences and Defences.
6 R. v. Andrews, [2012] B.C.J. No. 2826, 2012 BCPC 486 (B.C. Prov. Ct.). See also R. v.
Ovando Renderos, [2012] B.C.J. No. 2807, 2012 BCPC 467 (B.C. Prov. Ct.); R. v. Peepre,
[2012] B.C.J. No. 1928, 2012 BCPC 328 (B.C. Prov. Ct.); R. v. Williams, [2012] B.C.J. No.
2066, 2012 BCPC 345 (B.C. Prov. Ct.); R. v. MacMillan, [2013] B.C.J. No. 80, 2013 BCPC
7 (B.C. Prov. Ct.).
7 R. v. Wernicke, [2012] B.C.J. No. 2729, 2012 BCPC 451 (B.C. Prov. Ct.).

---- End of Request ---Download Request: Current Document: 1

Time Of Request: Tuesday, February 16, 2016

17:05:45