When assessing whether a second trial should be permanently stayed as an abuse of process on the ground of oppression, the court must consider the effect of the prosecutorial decision to split charges across separate trials (even if made in good faith), must individually assess the oppressive effect on each accused rather than treating co-accused collectively, and must not place excessive weight on reductions in evidence without adequately considering other factors including delay, conditions of incarceration, and the modest nature of additional criminality. The overlap in evidence between trials, while relevant, is only one factor in the balancing exercise.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.