Informations and Indictments: Difference between revisions
m Text replacement - "R v {{supra1" to "{{supra1" |
No edit summary |
||
| (73 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[fr:Dénonciations et actes d'accusation]] | |||
{{Currency2|January|2020}} | |||
{{LevelZero}}{{HeaderCharges}} | {{LevelZero}}{{HeaderCharges}} | ||
==Informations and Indictments== | ==Informations and Indictments== | ||
Criminal charges are set out in written form, either through an Indictment or an Information. An Indictment is the form of a charge typically handled in superior court while an information is the form used in provincial court. | Criminal charges are set out in written form, either through an Indictment or an Information. An Indictment is the form of a charge typically handled in superior court while an information is the form used in provincial court. | ||
; Indictment | |||
Section 2 defines "indictment" stating: | Section 2 defines "indictment" stating: | ||
{{ | {{quotation2| | ||
2<br> | 2<br> | ||
indictment includes | {{ellipsis}} | ||
'''"indictment"''' includes | |||
:(a) information or a count therein, | :(a) information or a count therein, | ||
:(b) a plea, replication or other pleading, and | :(b) a plea, replication or other pleading, and | ||
:(c) any record; | :(c) any record; | ||
{{ellipsis}} | |||
| | {{History-S2}} | ||
|{{CCCSec2|2}} | |||
|{{NoteUp|2}} | |||
}} | }} | ||
Under the English common law, there was a system of laying indictments that would permit an indictment against an accused by either a grand jury or coroner's inquest. Section 576 abolished these modes of laying indictments. | Under the English common law, there was a system of laying indictments that would permit an indictment against an accused by either a grand jury or coroner's inquest. Section 576 abolished these modes of laying indictments. | ||
; Information | |||
Section 785 defines "information": | Section 785 defines "information": | ||
{{ | {{quotation2| | ||
785 In this Part {{AnnSec|Part XXVII}}<br> | |||
"information" includes | {{ellipsis}} | ||
'''"information"''' includes | |||
:(a) a count in an information, and | :(a) a count in an information, and | ||
:(b) a complaint in respect of which a justice is authorized by an Act of Parliament or an enactment made thereunder to make an order; (dénonciation) | :(b) a complaint in respect of which a justice is authorized by an Act of Parliament or an enactment made thereunder to make an order; (dénonciation) | ||
{{ellipsis}} | |||
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 785; | |||
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 785; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), ss. 170, 203; 1992, c. 1, s. 58; 1995, c. 22, s. 7, c. 39, s. 156; 1996, c. 19, s. 76; 1999, c. 25, s. 23(Preamble); 2002, c. 13, s. 78; 2006, c. 14, s. 7; 2013, c. 11, s. 4. | R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, ss. 170, 203; | ||
{{LegHistory90s|1992, c. 1}}, s. 58; | |||
| | {{LegHistory90s|1995, c. 22}}, s. 7, c. 39, s. 156; | ||
{{LegHistory90s|1996, c. 19}}, s. 76; | |||
{{LegHistory90s|1999, c. 25}}, s. 23(Preamble); | |||
{{LegHistory00s|2002, c. 13}}, s. 78; | |||
{{LegHistory00s|2006, c. 14}}, s. 7; | |||
{{LegHistory10s|2013, c. 11}}, s. 4; | |||
{{LegHistory10s|2018, c. 16}}, s. 223, c. 21, s. 26; | |||
{{LegHistory10s|2019, c. 25}}, s. 314. | |||
{{Annotation}} | |||
|{{CCCSec2|785}} | |||
|{{NoteUp|785}} | |||
}} | }} | ||
An '''information''' is a accusation sworn by a peace officer. (s. 507, 508, 788, 789 and [[Criminal_Code_Forms#Form_2|Form 2]]) The '''indictment''' is an unsworn accusation.(s.566,580, 591 and Form 4) | An '''information''' is a accusation sworn by a peace officer. (s. 507, 508, 788, 789 and [[Criminal_Code_Forms#Form_2|Form 2]]) The '''indictment''' is an unsworn accusation.(s.566,580, 591 and Form 4) | ||
The purpose of an information was described as;<ref> | The purpose of an information was described as;<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Akey|g1ck8|1990 CanLII 6755 (ONSC)|[1990] OJ No 2205 (Gen. Div.)}}{{perONSC|Granger J}}{{atL|g1ck8|6}}</ref> | |||
#to commence the proceedings until the accused is arraigned or the charges dismissed; | #to commence the proceedings until the accused is arraigned or the charges dismissed; | ||
#to inform the accused of the allegations against him or her; | #to inform the accused of the allegations against him or her; | ||
| Line 42: | Line 59: | ||
==Validity of the Information or Indictment== | ==Validity of the Information or Indictment== | ||
[ | [{{CCCSec|580}} Sections 580 to 601] sets out the criteria for a valid information. | ||
{{ | {{quotation2| | ||
; Form of indictment | |||
580 An indictment is sufficient if it is on paper and is in Form 4. | 580 An indictment is sufficient if it is on paper and is in Form 4 {{AnnSec|Form 4}}. | ||
| | R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. C-46}}, s. 580; | ||
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)}}, s. 117. | |||
{{Annotation}} | |||
|{{CCCSec2|580}} | |||
|{{NoteUp|580}} | |||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 56: | Line 77: | ||
The more modern approach to validity of an information is more focused on substance rather than technical form considered in the older approach.<ref> | The more modern approach to validity of an information is more focused on substance rather than technical form considered in the older approach.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Sault Ste. Marie|1mkbt|1978 CanLII 11 (SCC)|40 CCC (2d)}}{{perSCC|Dickson J}} (9:0), at 353 | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
The date "is relevant and material only when the issue of limitation periods arises"<ref> | The date "is relevant and material only when the issue of limitation periods arises"<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Dean|27t5r|1985 CanLII 1142 (AB QB)|36 Alta LR (2d) 8 (Q.B.)}}{{perABQB|McFadyen J}}</ref> | |||
Where the date is in error, it may be that the proper date can be inferred. | |||
Where the date of the information has been amended without any indication of the circumstances creates a nullity. <ref> | Where the date of the information has been amended without any indication of the circumstances creates a nullity. <ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Howell|27p4d|1978 CanLII 692 (AB QB)|14 AR 299}}{{perABQB|Robotham J}}</ref> | |||
It is often said that an information that contains on its face contained a contradiction that was an impossibility is a nullity. <ref> | It is often said that an information that contains on its face contained a contradiction that was an impossibility is a nullity. <ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|George|1qlcm|1993 CanLII 4609 (NS SC)|340 APR 30}}{{perNSSC|MacLellan J}}</ref> | |||
; Presumptions and Burdens | |||
There is a rebuttable presumption that a justice of the peace will only operate within their authority.<ref> | There is a rebuttable presumption that a justice of the peace will only operate within their authority.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIR-N|Justice of the Peace; Ex Parte Robertson|, [1971] 1 OR 12 (CA)}}</ref> | |||
There is a presumption that an information is valid on its face.<ref> | There is a presumption that an information is valid on its face.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Kamperman|gcm03|1981 CanLII 3159 (NS SC)|, 48 NSR (2d)}}{{perNSSC|Glube J}}{{atL|gcm03|9}} ("There is a presumption that the information is valid on its face and the onus is upon the accused to rebut that presumption ")<br> | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
The onus is upon the accused to establish on a balance of probabilities that the information is defective.<ref> | The onus is upon the accused to establish on a balance of probabilities that the information is defective.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRx|Awad|g0nng|2013 NSPC 82 (CanLII)}}{{perNSPC|Whalen J}}{{atL|g0nng|51}} aff'd at {{CanLII|gg43m|2015 NSCA 10 (CanLII)}}{{perNSCA|Beveridge JA}}<br> | |||
{{CanLIIRP|Peavoy|htwgg|1974 CanLII 1665 (ONSC)|15 CCC (2d) 97}}{{perONSC|Henry J}}<br> | |||
{{CanLIIR-N|Vanstone|, 1982 Carswell Alta. 626}}{{at-|30}}<br> | |||
{{supra1|Kamperman}} | {{supra1|Kamperman}}{{atL|gcm03|9}} ("There is a presumption that the information is valid on its face and the onus is upon the accused to rebut that presumption ")<br> | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
| Line 87: | Line 113: | ||
===Types of Errors=== | ===Types of Errors=== | ||
; Defects to the Jurat | |||
A "jurat" is the part of an information where a judicial officer certifies the document.<ref> | A "jurat" is the part of an information where a judicial officer certifies the document.<ref> | ||
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/J/Jurat.aspx Duhaime's Law Dictionary: "jurat"<br> | http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/J/Jurat.aspx Duhaime's Law Dictionary: "jurat"<br> | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
Where the jurat is missing, or where parts of the information were not seen by the judicial officer who certified the document, the result can be a nullification of the document.<ref> | Where the jurat is missing, or where parts of the information were not seen by the judicial officer who certified the document, the result can be a nullification of the document.<ref> | ||
e.g. | e.g. {{CanLIIRP|Yerxa|2bzfc|1991 CanLII 6234 (NB QB)|285 APR 24}}{{perNBQB|Dickson J}} | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
; Bilingualism | |||
Under [ | Under [{{CCCSec|841}} s. 841(3)] the boiler-plate or pre-printed portion of the information or indictment must be in both french and english.<ref> | ||
cf. | cf. {{CanLIIR-N|Shields|, [1990] OJ No 2534 (Ont.Dist.Ct.)}} - information a nullity, suggests ''all'' document must be bilingual<br> | ||
{{CanLIIR-N|Noiseux| (1999) 135 CCC (3d) 225}} - this also applies to release documents <br> | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
The failure to have an information comply with s. 841 does not render the information a nullity. Deficiencies can be corrected through amendment under s. 601.<ref> | |||
{{CanLIIRP|Goodine|1mrz1|1992 CanLII 2618 (NS CA)|71 CCC (3d) 146}}{{perNSCA|Hallett JA}} | |||
</ref> | |||
There is some suggestion that it will only be a nullity where there is prejudice to the accused.<ref> | There is some suggestion that it will only be a nullity where there is prejudice to the accused.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Sorensen|g18gr|1990 CanLII 6852 (ONSC)|59 CCC (3d) 211)}}{{perONSC|Then J}}<br> | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
Section 841 will not apply for summary proceedings.<ref> | Section 841 will not apply for summary proceedings.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIR-N|Joudrey| (1992), 309 APR 117 (NSPC)}} | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
; Lost Information | |||
A trial for a regulatory offence can still proceed despite the information having been lost. <ref> | A trial for a regulatory offence can still proceed despite the information having been lost. <ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|City of Toronto|fkqf1|2011 ONCJ 131 (CanLII)|OJ No 1293}}{{perONCJ|Green J}}</ref> | |||
; Signatures | |||
While it is acceptable for an affiant to sign by way of a rubber stamp, it is not permitted for an authorizing justice to use a stamp as it is "irreconcilable with the solemnity and importance" of the oath swearing process.<ref> | While it is acceptable for an affiant to sign by way of a rubber stamp, it is not permitted for an authorizing justice to use a stamp as it is "irreconcilable with the solemnity and importance" of the oath swearing process.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Welsford|1vk2d|1967 CanLII 36 (ON CA)|[1967] 2 OR 496}}{{perONCA|McGillivray JA}} | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
| Line 123: | Line 150: | ||
===Other Errors=== | ===Other Errors=== | ||
{{ | {{quotation2| | ||
; No reference to previous conviction | |||
664 No indictment in respect of an offence for which, by reason of previous convictions, a greater punishment may be imposed shall contain any reference to previous convictions. | 664 No indictment in respect of an offence for which, by reason of previous convictions, a greater punishment may be imposed shall contain any reference to previous convictions. | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
R.S., c. C-34, s. 591. | R.S., c. C-34, s. 591. | ||
| | |{{CCCSec2|664}} | ||
|{{NoteUp|664}} | |||
}} | }} | ||
==Effect of Defects and Nullities== | ==Effect of Defects and Nullities== | ||
Where a defect is found, the information cannot stand. It may only be amended within the authority of the Criminal Code.<ref> | Where a defect is found, the information cannot stand. It may only be amended within the authority of the Criminal Code.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIR-N|Vanstone|, 1982 Carswell Alta. 626}}{{at-|30}}<br> | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
Absent an information being a nullity, s. 601 gives the judge powers to cure defects.<ref> | Absent an information being a nullity, s. 601 gives the judge powers to cure defects.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Awad|gg43m|2015 NSCA 10 (CanLII)|1126 APR 116}}{{perNSCA|Beverdige JA}}{{atL|gg43m|15}} citing trial judge <br> | |||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
; Corrections | |||
Any amendment to fix a defect must be done before the conclusion of trial.<ref> | Any amendment to fix a defect must be done before the conclusion of trial.<ref> | ||
{{supra1|Vanstone}} at | {{supra1|Vanstone}}{{at-|30}}<br> | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
Latest revision as of 19:18, 6 September 2024
| This page was last substantively updated or reviewed January 2020. (Rev. # 96396) |
Informations and Indictments
Criminal charges are set out in written form, either through an Indictment or an Information. An Indictment is the form of a charge typically handled in superior court while an information is the form used in provincial court.
- Indictment
Section 2 defines "indictment" stating:
2
...
"indictment" includes
- (a) information or a count therein,
- (b) a plea, replication or other pleading, and
- (c) any record;
...
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 2; R.S., 1985, c. 11 (1st Supp.), s. 2, c. 27 (1st Supp.), ss. 2, 203, c. 31 (1st Supp.), s. 61, c. 1 (2nd Supp.), s. 213, c. 27 (2nd Supp.), s. 10, c. 35 (2nd Supp.), s. 34, c. 32 (4th Supp.), s. 55, c. 40 (4th Supp.), s. 2; 1990, c. 17, s. 7; 1991, c. 1, s. 28, c. 40, s. 1, c. 43, ss. 1, 9; 1992, c. 20, s. 216, c. 51, s. 32; 1993, c. 28, s. 78, c. 34, s. 59; 1994, c. 44, s. 2; 1995, c. 29, ss. 39, 40, c. 39, s. 138; 1997, c. 23, s. 1; 1998, c. 30, s. 14; 1999, c. 3, s. 25, c. 5, s. 1, c. 25, s. 1(Preamble), c. 28, s. 155; 2000, c. 12, s. 91, c. 25, s. 1(F); 2001, c. 32, s. 1, c. 41, ss. 2, 131; 2002, c. 7, s. 137, c. 22, s. 324; 2003, c. 21, s. 1; 2004, c. 3, s. 1; 2005, c. 10, s. 34, c. 38, s. 58, c. 40, ss. 1, 7; 2006, c. 14, s. 1; 2007, c. 13, s. 1; 2012, c.1, s. 160, c. 19, s. 371; 2013, c. 13, s. 2; 2014, c. 17, s. 1, c. 23, s. 2, c. 25, s. 2; 2015, c. 3, s. 44, c. 13, s. 3, c. 20, s. 15; 2018, c. 21, s. 12; 2019, c. 13, s. 140; 2019, c. 25, s. 1; 2022, c. 17, s. 1.
Under the English common law, there was a system of laying indictments that would permit an indictment against an accused by either a grand jury or coroner's inquest. Section 576 abolished these modes of laying indictments.
- Information
Section 785 defines "information":
785 In this Part [Pt. XXVII – Summary Convictions (ss. 785 to 840)]
...
"information" includes
- (a) a count in an information, and
- (b) a complaint in respect of which a justice is authorized by an Act of Parliament or an enactment made thereunder to make an order; (dénonciation)
...
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 785; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), ss. 170, 203; 1992, c. 1, s. 58; 1995, c. 22, s. 7, c. 39, s. 156; 1996, c. 19, s. 76; 1999, c. 25, s. 23(Preamble); 2002, c. 13, s. 78; 2006, c. 14, s. 7; 2013, c. 11, s. 4; 2018, c. 16, s. 223, c. 21, s. 26; 2019, c. 25, s. 314.
[annotation(s) added]
An information is a accusation sworn by a peace officer. (s. 507, 508, 788, 789 and Form 2) The indictment is an unsworn accusation.(s.566,580, 591 and Form 4)
The purpose of an information was described as;[1]
- to commence the proceedings until the accused is arraigned or the charges dismissed;
- to inform the accused of the allegations against him or her;
- to indicate that an allegation has been made under oath before a justice of the peace; and
- for a summary conviction offence, to indicate to the accused that the information was sworn within six months after the time when the subject-matter of the proceedings arose: s. 786(2) of the Criminal Code.
- ↑ R v Akey, 1990 CanLII 6755 (ONSC), [1990] OJ No 2205 (Gen. Div.), per Granger J, at para 6
Validity of the Information or Indictment
Sections 580 to 601 sets out the criteria for a valid information.
- Form of indictment
580 An indictment is sufficient if it is on paper and is in Form 4 [forms].
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 580; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 117.
[annotation(s) added]
An indictment should be in conformity with Form 4.[1]
The more modern approach to validity of an information is more focused on substance rather than technical form considered in the older approach.[2]
The date "is relevant and material only when the issue of limitation periods arises"[3] Where the date is in error, it may be that the proper date can be inferred.
Where the date of the information has been amended without any indication of the circumstances creates a nullity. [4]
It is often said that an information that contains on its face contained a contradiction that was an impossibility is a nullity. [5]
- Presumptions and Burdens
There is a rebuttable presumption that a justice of the peace will only operate within their authority.[6]
There is a presumption that an information is valid on its face.[7]
The onus is upon the accused to establish on a balance of probabilities that the information is defective.[8]
- ↑ see s. 580 "An indictment is sufficient if it is on paper and is in Form 4."
- ↑ R v Sault Ste. Marie, 1978 CanLII 11 (SCC), 40 CCC (2d), per Dickson J (9:0), at 353
- ↑ R v Dean, 1985 CanLII 1142 (AB QB), 36 Alta LR (2d) 8 (Q.B.), per McFadyen J
- ↑ R v Howell, 1978 CanLII 692 (AB QB), 14 AR 299, per Robotham J
- ↑ R v George, 1993 CanLII 4609 (NS SC), 340 APR 30, per MacLellan J
- ↑ R v Justice of the Peace; Ex Parte Robertson, [1971] 1 OR 12 (CA)(*no CanLII links)
- ↑
R v Kamperman, 1981 CanLII 3159 (NS SC), , 48 NSR (2d), per Glube J, at para 9 ("There is a presumption that the information is valid on its face and the onus is upon the accused to rebut that presumption ")
- ↑
R v Awad, 2013 NSPC 82 (CanLII), per Whalen J, at para 51 aff'd at 2015 NSCA 10 (CanLII), per Beveridge JA
R v Peavoy, 1974 CanLII 1665 (ONSC), 15 CCC (2d) 97, per Henry J
R v Vanstone, 1982 Carswell Alta. 626(*no CanLII links) , at para 30
Kamperman, supra, at para 9 ("There is a presumption that the information is valid on its face and the onus is upon the accused to rebut that presumption ")
Motion to Quash the Information
Where the process required by s. 504 to 508 is not complied with and it results in a loss of jurisdiction allows the accused to apply to quash the information.
Types of Errors
- Defects to the Jurat
A "jurat" is the part of an information where a judicial officer certifies the document.[1] Where the jurat is missing, or where parts of the information were not seen by the judicial officer who certified the document, the result can be a nullification of the document.[2]
- Bilingualism
Under s. 841(3) the boiler-plate or pre-printed portion of the information or indictment must be in both french and english.[3] The failure to have an information comply with s. 841 does not render the information a nullity. Deficiencies can be corrected through amendment under s. 601.[4] There is some suggestion that it will only be a nullity where there is prejudice to the accused.[5]
Section 841 will not apply for summary proceedings.[6]
- Lost Information
A trial for a regulatory offence can still proceed despite the information having been lost. [7]
- Signatures
While it is acceptable for an affiant to sign by way of a rubber stamp, it is not permitted for an authorizing justice to use a stamp as it is "irreconcilable with the solemnity and importance" of the oath swearing process.[8]
- ↑
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/J/Jurat.aspx Duhaime's Law Dictionary: "jurat"
- ↑ e.g. R v Yerxa, 1991 CanLII 6234 (NB QB), 285 APR 24, per Dickson J
- ↑
cf. R v Shields, [1990] OJ No 2534 (Ont.Dist.Ct.)(*no CanLII links)
- information a nullity, suggests all document must be bilingual
R v Noiseux (1999) 135 CCC (3d) 225(*no CanLII links) - this also applies to release documents
- ↑ R v Goodine, 1992 CanLII 2618 (NS CA), 71 CCC (3d) 146, per Hallett JA
- ↑
R v Sorensen, 1990 CanLII 6852 (ONSC), 59 CCC (3d) 211), per Then J
- ↑ R v Joudrey (1992), 309 APR 117 (NSPC)(*no CanLII links)
- ↑ R v City of Toronto, 2011 ONCJ 131 (CanLII), OJ No 1293, per Green J
- ↑ R v Welsford, 1967 CanLII 36 (ON CA), [1967] 2 OR 496, per McGillivray JA
Other Errors
Effect of Defects and Nullities
Where a defect is found, the information cannot stand. It may only be amended within the authority of the Criminal Code.[1]
Absent an information being a nullity, s. 601 gives the judge powers to cure defects.[2]
- Corrections
Any amendment to fix a defect must be done before the conclusion of trial.[3]
- ↑
R v Vanstone, 1982 Carswell Alta. 626(*no CanLII links)
, at para 30
- ↑
R v Awad, 2015 NSCA 10 (CanLII), 1126 APR 116, per Beverdige JA, at para 15 citing trial judge
- ↑
Vanstone, supra, at para 30
See Topics
- Laying of an Information and Issuing Process
- Direct Indictments
- Form and Content of Charges
- Joinder and Severance of Charges
- Amendments to Charges
Case Digests
Categories:
- 2020
- Level Zero
- Procedure and Practice
- 1985, c. C-46
- 1985, c. 11 (1st Supp.)
- 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.)
- 1985, c. 31 (1st Supp.)
- 1985, c. 1 (2nd Supp.)
- 1985, c. 27 (2nd Supp.)
- 1985, c. 35 (2nd Supp.)
- 1985, c. 32 (4th Supp.)
- 1985, c. 40 (4th Supp.)
- 1990, c. 17
- 1991, c. 1
- 1991, c. 40
- 1991, c. 43
- 1992, c. 20
- 1992, c. 51
- 1993, c. 28
- 1993, c. 34
- 1994, c. 44
- 1995, c. 29
- 1995, c. 39
- 1997, c. 23
- 1998, c. 30
- 1999, c. 3
- 1999, c. 5
- 1999, c. 25
- 1999, c. 28
- 2000, c. 12
- 2000, c. 25
- 2001, c. 32
- 2001, c. 41
- 2002, c. 7
- 2002, c. 22
- 2003, c. 21
- 2004, c. 3
- 2005, c. 10
- 2005, c. 38
- 2005, c. 40
- 2006, c. 14
- 2007, c. 13
- 2012, c.1
- 2012, c. 19
- 2013, c. 13
- 2014, c. 17
- 2014, c. 23
- 2014, c. 25
- 2015, c. 3
- 2015, c. 13
- 2015, c. 20
- 2018, c. 21
- 2019, c. 13
- 2019, c. 25
- 2022, c. 17
- 1992, c. 1
- 1995, c. 22
- 1996, c. 19
- 2002, c. 13
- 2013, c. 11
- 2018, c. 16