R v Nardozzi

In the matter of R v Nardozzi, the applicant appealed against the sentence imposed for possession of heroin and cannabis sativa. The primary judge had concluded that there was a commercial element in the possession of both drugs. The applicant's counsel argued that the primary judge had misapplied the onus of proof, requiring the prosecution to prove the existence of a commercial element beyond reasonable doubt. The Court of Appeal examined whether the primary judge erred in his approach to the onus of proof and the standard of proof applied. The Chief Justice and McPherson J.A. held that no error had been shown in the approach taken by the sentencing judge, and the application for leave to appeal against sentence was dismissed. Pincus J.A., however, dissented, finding that the primary judge had erred in his application of the onus of proof and that the matter should be remitted for re-hearing on the question of sentence only.