LAW 2: University Court Observation Report - February 2020

This report details a law student's observation of a court proceeding at the Court of Appeal for Ontario. The student attended a hearing involving a young man charged with uttering a forged cheque. The report describes the courtroom setting, the roles of the individuals present, and the arguments presented by the defense solicitor, highlighting the defendant's mental health issues and the potential impact on his actions. The student observed the judge's decision to sentence the defendant to probation and community service and provides a personal reflection on whether justice was carried out, referencing the model of due process and the balance between individual rights and governmental powers. The report concludes with a reference list of sources used to support the analysis.

Running head: LAW
Independent Work Assignment
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Authors Note

1LAW
Introduction
For the purposes of making a report, a visit has been made to a Canadian Court to notice
and understand the court proceedings. This report contains the explanation of the court attended
in order to notice the court matters. It cannot be ignored that this type of court observation is
very vital and essential for the student of law. This type of visit helps the students to know the
court procedural system in Canada through the actual inspection of the court proceedings. The
case which has been observed is elaborated with various information, such as my expectation
regarding the court proceedings, while giving the decision whether the justice has been carried
out or not, information related to the description of the court room, behavior of the parties and
others.
1. The court which I have visited for the purpose of making this report is the Court of
Appeal for Ontario at around 10:30 am of 10th February, 2019 (Ontariocourts.ca, 2020). I
have spent around 2 hours and returned from there at around 12:30 pm. This court is
situated in momentous Osgoode Hall in downtown Toronto and deals with the wide range
of civil appeals, such as dispute related to family, property and business, bankruptcies,
negligence claims, and corporate reorganizations. Almost 25 percent of the motions are
generally heard by a judge in a year and are dealt with by panels of three judges.
2. The disputed matter which I have observed in the court was the case of a young white
skinned guy who was charged with the offense of uttering a forged cheque and pleaded
himself guilty (Barrett 2018). When I have entered in to the court room, the hearing has
started already and it was in the trial stage.
3. Apart from the judge, the other persons who were present in the court room at that time
are a clerk, a prosecutor, two defence solicitors and two corrective service officers. I have

2LAW
observed that the defendants generally sat in the public gallery or inside the waiting room
(Ontariocourts.ca 2020).
4. When I have entered into the court room, the case was at the trial stage. The defence
solicitor argued that the guy was normally not a dishonest person. He has mental health
problems and under medication. He wanted to change his accommodation for which huge
amount is required and in order to obtain that money he tried to defraud the financial
institution by using fraudulent signatures on cheques. Forgery cannot be committed under
mental illness. According to the solicitor may be in order to escape strict punishment the
defendant pleaded himself guilty as the maximum punishment for forgery is incarceration
for 10 years (Euvrard and Leclerc 2017).
5. After seeing the facts of the case the judge sentenced him to probation and community
service of 72 hours. The defendant was very happy with the decision but the manager of
the financial institute is not. According to him this type of lenient decision will encourage
the people in committing bank frauds.
6. This decision of the judge did not surprise me because the court focused on the model of
due process which mainly focuses on the freedom and rights of the people by restricting
the governmental powers (Puri 2014). Therefore, I think the decision was justified.

3LAW
Reference
Barrett, M., 2018. Worthless Cheques and Financial Honour: Cheque Fraud and Canadian
Gentlemen Officers during the First World War. Histoire sociale/Social history, 51(104),
pp.301-328.
Euvrard, E. and Leclerc, C., 2017. Pre-trial detention and guilty pleas: Inducement or
coercion? Punishment & Society, 19(5), pp.525-542.
Ontariocourts.ca. (2020). Court of Appeal for Ontario. [online] Available at:
https://www.ontariocourts.ca/coa/en/ [Accessed 11 Feb. 2020].
Puri, P., 2014. Profitable Justice: Aligning Third-Party Financing of Litigation with the
Normative Functions of the Canadian Judicial System. Can. Bus. LJ, 55, p.34.