Canadian Criminal Law/Offences/Keeping Common Bawdy-house

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to: navigation, search

Keeping common bawdy-house
210. (1) Every one who keeps a common bawdy-house is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
Landlord, inmate, etc.
(2) Every one who

(a) is an inmate of a common bawdy-house,
(b) is found, without lawful excuse, in a common bawdy-house, or
(c) as owner, landlord, lessor, tenant, occupier, agent or otherwise having charge or control of any place, knowingly permits the place or any part thereof to be let or used for the purposes of a common bawdy-house,

is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Notice of conviction to be served on owner
(3) Where a person is convicted of an offence under subsection (1), the court shall cause a notice of the conviction to be served on the owner, landlord or lessor of the place in respect of which the person is convicted or his agent, and the notice shall contain a statement to the effect that it is being served pursuant to this section.
Duty of landlord on notice
(4) Where a person on whom a notice is served under subsection (3) fails forthwith to exercise any right he may have to determine the tenancy or right of occupation of the person so convicted, and thereafter any person is convicted of an offence under subsection (1) in respect of the same premises, the person on whom the notice was served shall be deemed to have committed an offence under subsection (1) unless he proves that he has taken all reasonable steps to prevent the recurrence of the offence.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 193.

Transporting person to bawdy-house
211. Every one who knowingly takes, transports, directs, or offers to take, transport or direct, any other person to a common bawdy-house is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 194.

CCC

Proof of the Offence[edit]

The Crown must prove that:[1]

  1. the accused's conduct, by its nature, caused harm or presented a significant risk of harm to individuals or society
  2. the risk was in a way that undermined or threatened to undermine a value reflected in and formally endorsed by the Constitution or other fundamental laws by
    1. confronting members of the public with conduct that significantly interferes with their autonomy and liberty; or
    2. predisposing others to anti-social behaviour; or
    3. physically or psychologically harming persons involved in the conduct, and
  3. the harm or risk of harm is of a degree that is incompatible with the proper functioning of society.


  1. R. v. Labaye 2005 SCC 80 (CanLII), [2005] 3 SCR 728 at para. 62

Interpretation[edit]

The categories of harm is not a closed list.[1]

  1. Labaye