R. v. Rowan, 2018 Leduct Provincial Court – No Contact Bail Breach Receives Lessor Sentence As Neither Party Wanted Condition


Accused pleaded guilty to breach of a ‘no-go’ recognizance condition in relation to her domestic partner of 20 years. Neither the accused nor victim had any intention of abiding by the condition. Indigenous accused with a related prior record.

Held: 10 days’ imprisonment plus 5 days credit for pre-trial custody.

Discussion of no contact/no-go bail terms, and specific sentence considerations for these breaches where the accused is Indigenous. Conditions prohibiting contact may be “unrealistic or unreasonable” where neither the accused nor complainant desire the condition. “Based on the foregoing, I will expect going forward that the prosecution provide detailed information relevant to the fundamental principle of sentencing (s.718.1) for this type of offence. Was the addition of a ‘no contact / no go’ condition ‘automatic’ or were there circumstances warranting addition of that clause in the context of that case? What consideration was given to the accused’s accommodation or living circumstances? What role did the victim play in breaching the ‘no contact / no go’ condition?”

D. Paull – Defence Counsel