Précis: The Crown issued a requirement to Mr. Lee and then brought this application for a compliance order. The Court found that the language used in the requirement was so broad that it could not determine whether it was addressed to Mr. Lee or would include documentation about corporate assets that he would only have access to in his capacity as a director or officer of a number of corporations. As a result the application was dismissed, but without costs.
R. v. Lee: Minister not entitled to compliance order where identity of person required to comply not clearREAD MORE »