Legal Project Management Plan & Checklist
Purpose of this Guide: Use this plan when representing an accused person in a Canadian criminal proceeding where the net trial delay exceeds or approaches the constitutional limits under Section 11(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It guides defence counsel through calculating net delay, maintaining chronological logs, and bringing applications for a permanent stay of proceedings under Section 24(1).
Jurisdiction: This plan operates under Canadian federal criminal law and is applicable across all provincial and superior criminal courts. The forks address: (1) representing an accused in a Superior Court trial or Provincial Court trial with a preliminary inquiry (30-month ceiling), (2) managing sub-ceiling delay applications where the defense bears the onus (below 18 or 30 months), and (3) navigating the accelerated Ontario Court of Justice case management rules (effective June 1, 2026).
The Process at a Glance: The process begins at the intake stage where counsel reviews the case history, records the charge date, and opens a chronological log. Counsel monitors all court appearances, ensuring that any delay caused by Crown disclosure failures or court backlog is documented, and that any defense consent to a future date is carefully restricted to avoid implicit waiver. If the net delay exceeds or is projected to exceed the presumptive ceiling (18 or 30 months), counsel drafts a Notice of Application and a Notice of Constitutional Question. Counsel serves the Attorneys General of Canada and the province, files the materials with court transcripts, and argues the motion to secure a permanent stay.
Use this fork when representing an accused person whose trial is conducted in a superior court, or where a preliminary inquiry has been scheduled or held in provincial court, invoking the 30-month presumptive ceiling under the Jordan framework. It addresses specific considerations for preliminary inquiries and co-accused scheduling conflicts under R. v. Jacques-Taylor.
Use this fork when representing an accused where the net trial delay is below the presumptive Jordan ceilings (18 or 30 months), but the defense asserts that the delay is constitutionally unreasonable under Section 11(b). It guides counsel through the heavy onus of proving proactive, documented efforts to expedite and showing the case took markedly longer than reasonable.
Use this fork for criminal proceedings in the Ontario Court of Justice for Informations sworn on or after June 1, 2026. It guides defence counsel through the strict case management reforms that restrict matters to a maximum of three appearances in case management court before they must be set for trial or resolution.
Key Legislation and Case Law: Governed by Section 11(b) and Section 24(1) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Justice Laws) and Part XXVII of the Criminal Code (Justice Laws). The leading frameworks are established by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Jordan, 2016 SCC 27, establishing firm 18- and 30-month ceilings, and R. v. Cody, 2017 SCC 31, clarifying deductible defense delay. Recent 2026 recalibrations include R. v. Jacques-Taylor, 2026 SCC 20, clarifying joint trials, and R. v. Vrbanic, 2026 SCC 19, detailing the case complexity exception. Additional case research is conducted on CanLII (Canadian Legal Information Institute).
* Disclaimer: We're nobody's lawyer, because we aren't lawyers. You are, so you know better than to take legal advice from an app. We also aren't accountants or dog trainers - just digital spirit guides taking zero liability for any of this. This site exists to gather the collective knowledge of practitioners like you. Verify everything and submit your feedback on the Section 11(b) Trial Delay Application (Accused) matter plan to improve the playbook. THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE, it's a request for input.
This legal matter plan provides a structured workflow for Criminal Law cases, outlining the standard Litigation process. Utilize these tracking templates to manage your legal cases efficiently.
Verify all prerequisite documentation has been obtained, cross-reference against the statutory requirements for this matter type, and confirm compliance with practice direction protocols.
Got a question about this plan?
Ask in the practitioner Discord - edge cases, rule changes, and jurisdiction-specific nuances, all in one place.
Prepare the relevant forms and supporting materials required under the applicable legislation, ensuring all mandatory fields are completed and all attachments are properly certified.
Draft and dispatch formal correspondence addressing the procedural requirements at this stage, including any required notices, requests for information, or proposals for resolution.
Coordinate the collection and review of all financial documentation required for disclosure, including statements, valuations, and supporting schedules as mandated by the rules.
Conduct a thorough review of all filed materials to ensure compliance with court requirements, verify service obligations have been met, and prepare for the next procedural milestone.
Assess the strategic considerations for interim applications, prepare supporting evidence, and draft the necessary documentation for urgent or time-sensitive relief sought.
Verify all prerequisite documentation has been obtained, cross-reference against the statutory requirements for this matter type, and confirm compliance with practice direction protocols.
Prepare the relevant forms and supporting materials required under the applicable legislation, ensuring all mandatory fields are completed and all attachments are properly certified.
Draft and dispatch formal correspondence addressing the procedural requirements at this stage, including any required notices, requests for information, or proposals for resolution.