Law360 Canada ( May 29, 2026, 12:34 PM EDT) -- Appeal by the Crown from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal which affirmed a judgment granting a stay of proceedings. The respondents were jointly charged with several offences in relation to a drug trafficking operation. They were part of 18 individuals who were divided into 10 overlapping prosecution groups. Some individuals were to participate in a Garofoli application and were given trial dates over the Jordan ceiling. The Crown mistakenly provided the respondents with trial dates that were past the 18-month Jordan ceiling for trials in provincial court. The respondents’ counsel did not raise concerns about the assignment of the later trial dates. The respondents sought a stay of proceedings on the basis that their right to be tried within a reasonable time had been breached. The application judge found that the Crown had not met its burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances and held that the delay was not justified. The Crown argued that the application judge had erred by failing to consider the complexity of the case. The majority of the Court of Appeal found that the application judge’s assessment of whether the case was particularly complex was free from error and entitled to deference. The appeal was dismissed. The main issue before the Court was whether the application judge misapplied the governing principles on s. 11(b) of the Charter by failing to properly assess case complexity....