Theft and Shoplifting Lawyers in Brampton

An individual commits theft in Brampton when they take something that they do not have a legal right to. This can include stealing an item or money from a person or from a store or business, it can include stealing from one’s employer and can also include time theft which occurs when an employee gets paid for work they did not do. Theft offences in Canada are categories based on the value of the theft, splitting offences into theft over $5,000 and theft under $5,000. The higher the value of the theft, the more severe the penalty will be for the accused.

In 2016, the Firm represented an individual accused of committing theft and fraud against his employer in the case of R. v. J.A. [2016]. The accused was arrested after his employer alleged that he stole roughly $3,000 worth of sports merchandise from the Roger’s Centre. The matter was reported to law enforcement and the individual was terminated from his position. The Firm managed to call into question some of the Crown’s evidence, leading to a withdrawal of three theft and fraud charges.

Theft is a non-sexual and non-violent crime, and one of the most common offences in Canada. The Peel Regional Police reported 3,022 cases of shoplifting in 2021, the number rose to 4,392 in 2022. In addition, there were 10,149 reports of theft over and under $5,000 in 2021 in comparison to 2022, with 11,780 cases. There were 4,119 cases of theft of a motor vehicle in 2021, but 6,042 cases in 2022. Statistics Canada reported that the Peel Region consisted of 3.49% of total cases of theft under $5,000 in Ontario. Theft over $5,000 is indictable, while theft under $5,000 may be subject to a summary election.

The Firm regularly represents individuals charged with various theft offences in Brampton and in jurisdictions throughout Ontario including theft from one’s employer. Those accused of stealing from their employer will typically face either a theft under or theft over $5,000 charge, depending on the value of alleged theft. While the accused will be charged under the regular theft sections of the Code, cases involving theft from one’s employer will be prosecuted in a different manner than other theft offences. This is because of the trust employers place in their employees. Employers place their employees in a position of trust and authority within the company. Abusing that position is viewed as an aggravating factor which will justify more severe penalties for those convicted.

In 2019, the Firm successfully defended a client accused of stealing and defrauding their employer out of more than $170,000 in R. v. O.I. [2019]. The accused was an employee who allegedly used his position at the company to submit false returns and take the funds for his own personal use. After conducting an internal audit, the company uncovered suspicious activity and looked into the employee further, uncovering the alleged theft. The matter was further complicated by the fact that the employer sought to be reimbursed for the amount taken by the employee. The Firm challenged the inventory reports provided by the company, managing to exclude a significant portion of the alleged theft.

In 2017, the Firm represented an individual accused of defrauding the Bank of Nova Scotia of more than $50,000 in the case of R. v. S.A. [2017]. The accused was a Canada Post employee who used her position within the post office to create fraudulent tax document and a fake identity. She then used these fraudulent documents to open both a line of credit and a bank account with the bank. The banks sophisticated fraud detection department uncovered the suspicious activity and passed the information along to police who contacted and arrested the accused. After engaging in Crown negotiations, the Firm was unable to come to an agreement on an appropriate sentence with the Crown. The Firm scheduled a judicial pre-trial to get the matter before a judge and ultimately scheduled a contested plea hearing. The Firm resolved the most serious charges against the accused, and they were granted a conditional discharge, avoiding a permanent criminal record.

In 2023, the Firm represented an individual accused of stealing merchandise from the shipping department of his long-time employer in R. v. M.F. [2023]. The accused was terminated and charged with theft after his employer launched an internal investigation into missing merchandised and uncovered evidence implicating the accused. The employer alleged that video surveillance footage captured the accused removing a box of merchandise from a pallet of product to be shipped out and leaving the area with it. The employer alleged that the accused then left company property with the merchandise. The Firm reviewed the footage provided by the employer, uncovering various discrepancies and issues. The Crown ultimately agreed to withdrawal the charge at the request of the defence due to lack of reasonable prospect of conviction.

In addition to representing clients accused of stealing from their employer, Donich Law also has significant experience defending clients accused of shoplifting or committing retail fraud. Shoplifting is one of the most common criminal offences committed by Canadians and is committed by individuals from all walks of life.

In 2016, the Firm represented a licensed physician accused of stealing approximately $3,000 worth of merchandise from The Bay in R. v. S.Y. [2016]. The doctor was caught by loss prevention staff working for the store and reported to law enforcement. Regulated professionals including doctors may face additional penalties from their regulatory bodies if they are charged or convicted of a crime. The vast majority of regulatory bodies have a duty to report, which means those charged or convicted of certain offences must report their arrest to their regulatory body. The regulatory body may then launch an investigation of its own into the matter and prosecute the individual within the regulatory body. In this case the Firm secured a withdrawal of the charges, later destroying the client’s fingerprints and photographs and protecting his job as a physician.

In 2021 the Firm represented two co-accused charged with theft under $5,000 after allegedly stealing from a grocery store in the cases of R. v. D.H. [2021] and R. v. M.S. [2021]. The accused individuals were caught together by loss prevention with roughly $1,000 worth of product they had not paid for. Both young, first time offenders, the Firm recommended some up front work and negotiated with the Crown during pre-trials to secure a withdrawal for both individuals.