Canadian Criminal Law/Offences/Failure to Attend Court or Appear

145(4): appear on summons
In R. v. King, 2002 CanLII 40375, the Court stated the elements of the offence are:
 * 1) the accused was properly served with a summons; and
 * 2) the accused failed to appear at the place and time specified in the summons; or
 * 3) having appeared in accordance with the summons, the accused failed to appear thereafter as required by the court.

Generally
It is expected that the Crown shall prove the following:
 * 1. existence of the original charge against the accused (prove by calling the original charging officer)
 * 2. establish the date, time and jurisdiction of original offence
 * 3. ID of accused with respect to the original charge
 * 4. service of notice to appear (include date and time and method of service)
 * 5. file the notice to appear with the court
 * 6. file original information
 * 7. insure confirmation of original appearance notice
 * FAILURE TO APPEAR ON RETURN DATE
 * 8. date and time the accused was to appear
 * 9. that he didn't appear-- call the clerk who was in court on that day
 * 10. that the accused gave no excuse when arrested
 * PROOF of NON-ATTENDANCE by Certificate
 * 11. have clerk prepare certificate
 * 12. file certificate and notice of intention to produce

Section 145(5) does not simply apply to the first appearance in court. Rather it creates two offences. Firstly, of a failure to attend under the Identification or Criminals Act, and secondly, by missing any court appearance according to a promise to appear or appearance notice.

Interpretation
The burden is upon the accused to show a lawful excuse on a balance of probabilities.

The offence of failing to appear in court is not an offence of strict liability.

There is some debate on what constitutes the mens rea of failure to attend. Certain courts have stated that negligence is sufficient. While others have stated that it requires an intent (either wilful blindness or recklessness).

An honest mistake of the time and date of attendance as well as forgetfulness can serve to negate the mens rea of the offence. The accused must be able to show a due diligence.

Under s.145(9), the endorsements on the certificate of the clerk or judge saying that the accused was not in attendance "is evidence of the statements contained in the certificate without proof of the signature or the official character of the person appearing to have signed the certificate."s. 145(9)