Peine pour Fraude

Cette page a été mise à jour ou révisée de manière substantielle pour la dernière fois January 2020. (Rev. # 11915)

n.b.: Cette page est expérimentale. Si vous repérez une grammaire ou un texte anglais clairement incorrect, veuillez m'en informer à [email protected] et je le corrigerai dès que possible.

• < Droit pénal/Détermination de la peine
• < Infractions
• < Fraude

Aperçu

The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners created a taxonomy of fraud:

• Corruption
  • Conflict of Interest (purchasing schemes, sales schemes)
  • Bribery (Invoice kickbacks, bid rigging)
  • Illegal Gratuities
  • Economic Extortion
• Asset misappropriation
  • Cash
    • Theft of Cash on Hand
    • Theft of Cash Receipts
      • Skimming
        • Sales (unrecorded, understated)
        • Receivables (Write-off schemes, lapping schemes, unconcealed)
        • Refunds or Other
      • Cash Larceny
    • Fraudulent Disbursements
      • Billing Schemes (shell company, non-accomplice vendor, personal purchases)
      • Payroll Schemes (ghost employee, falsified wages, commission schemes)
      • Expense Reimbursement Schemes (mischaracterized expenses, overstated expenses, fictitious expenses, multiple reimbursements)
      • Cheque Tampering (forged maker, forged endorsement, altered payee, authorized maker)
      • Register Disbursements (False voids, false refunds)
  • Inventory and Other Assets
• Financial statement fraud
  • Net Worth/Net Income Overstatement (timing differences, fictitious revenues, concealed liabilities and expenses, improper asset valuations, improper disclosures)
  • Net Worth/Net Income Understatement (timing differences, understated revenues, overstated liabilities and expenses, improper asset valuations, improper disclosures)

Libellé de l'infraction

Fraud

380 (1) Every one who, by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, defrauds the public or any person, whether ascertained or not, of any property, money or valuable security or any service,

(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding fourteen years, where the subject-matter of the offence is a testamentary instrument or the value of the subject-matter of the offence exceeds five thousand dollars; or

(b) is guilty

(i) of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or

(ii) of an offence punishable on summary conviction,

where the value of the subject-matter of the offence does not exceed five thousand dollars.

Minimum punishment

(1.1) When a person is prosecuted on indictment and convicted of one or more offences referred to in subsection (1) [fraude], the court that imposes the sentence shall impose a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of two years if the total value of the subject-matter of the offences exceeds one million dollars.
[omis (2)]
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 380; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 54; 1994, c. 44, s. 25; 1997, c. 18, s. 26; 2004, c. 3, s. 2; 2011, c. 6, s. 2.
[annotation(s) ajoutée(s)]

– CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)

---

Draft Form of Charges

See Fraud (Offence)

Principes généraux

Pénalités maximales

Infraction(s)	Élection de la couronne	Pénalité maximale
art. 380(1)(a) [fraude de plus de 5 000 $] From September 15, 2004	N/A	14 ans d'emprisonnement
art. 380(1)(b) [fraude ne dépassant pas 5 000 $]	procédure sommaire	emprisonnement maximal de deux ans moins un jour ou d'une amende de 5 000 $ (du 19 septembre 2019)
art. 380(1)(b) [fraude ne dépassant pas 5 000 $]	punissable par mise en accusation	2 ans d'emprisonnement
art. 380(1)(a) [fraude de plus de 5 000 $] Until September 14, 2004	N/A	10 ans d'emprisonnement

Les infractions en vertu de l'art. art. 380(1)(a) [fraude de plus de 5 000 $] sont directement passibles d'une mise en accusation. La peine maximale est de 14 ans d'emprisonnement.

Les infractions visées par la clause art. 380(1)(b) [fraude ne dépassant pas 5 000 $] sont des infractions hybrides. Si elles sont poursuivies par mise en accusation, la peine maximale est de 2 ans d'emprisonnement. Si elles sont poursuivies par procédure sommaire, la peine maximale est de emprisonnement maximal de deux ans moins un jour ou d'une amende de 5 000 $ (du 19 septembre 2019).

Pénalités minimales

Ces infractions ne sont pas assorties de peines minimales obligatoires.

Dispositions disponibles

Offence(s)	Choix du mode de poursuite	Absolution l'art. 730	Ordonnances de probation l'art. 731(1)(a)	Amendes autonome l'art. 731(1)(b)	Détenues sous garde l'art. 718.3, 787	Détenues sous garde and Probation l'art. 731(1)(b)	Détenues sous garde and Amende l'art. 734	Ordonnances du sursis (ODS) l'art. 742.1
art. 380(1)(b) [fraude ne dépassant pas 5 000 $]	any
art. 380(1)(a) [fraude de plus de 5 000 $] Nov. 20, 2012 onward	N/A
art. 380(1)(a) [fraude de plus de 5 000 $] September 15, 2004 to Nov. 20, 2012	N/A
art. 380(1)(a) [fraude de plus de 5 000 $] Until September 14, 2004	N/A

Peines consécutive

Il n'y a aucune exigence légale selon laquelle les peines doivent être consécutives.

Mandatory Minimum

The mandatory minimum sentence for fraud over $1 million has been found in at least one instance to be unconstitutional as "cruel and unusual" punishment under s. 12 of the Charter.

Conditional Sentences

Conditional sentences are available for offences of fraud under $5,000.

Conditional sentences are available for offences of fraud over $5,000 where the offence was committed prior to the amendment to s. 742.1 on November 20, 2012.

Unless prohibited by law, the court should be considered a conditional sentence in all circumstances where incarceration is contemplated.

Custodial sentences are considered preferable "[w]here punitive objectives such as denunciation and deterrence are particularly pressing, such as in cases in which there are aggravating circumstances."

For most courts, the amount defrauded will be sufficient to determine if incarceration is required.

In major frauds involving breach of trust, denunciation and deterrence are to be emphasized and will usually result in jail sentences.

Certain courts have stated that conditional sentence orders should not be granted where there is a breach of trust. However, others suggest that it is not a full prohibition. Rather is it rate where it is a large scale fraud.

Incarceration is often ordered where there is no remorse. Also where there is no acceptance of responsibility.

Where there are exceptional or extreme personal mitigating circumstances, general deterrence can be satisfied by a conditional sentence.

Restitution and community service work are not sufficient to amount to exceptional circumstances to warrant a conditional sentence.

Where the aggravating factors overwhelm the mitigating factors, a sentence of imprisonment is mandated.

The “ruin and humiliation” brought upon the accused and his family due to the offence and professional loss coupled with a conditional sentence can be sufficient to satisfy denunciation and deterrence.

Res Judicata

A person convicted of fraud and income tax evasion may be sentenced separately for each offence.

Sentencing Principles

Primacy of General Deterrence and Denunciation

Major instances of fraud over $5,000 require emphasis on general deterrence and denunciation. The same goes for cases involving breach of trust and offences that involve a substantial amount of dishonesty.

The purpose of general deterrence is to assuage people from engaging in fraud which is often easy to commit and highly profitable. Without sufficient punishment, the temptation of taking the risk of a lesser punishment in exchange for a large sum of money would make it worthwhile.

Where general deterrence is to be emphasized there is limited concern to achieve rehabilitation.

Denunciation should adequately reflect the public’s condemnation of this offence and the offender’s conduct.

Where there is a "large-scale" fraud, it will generally attract a sentence of imprisonment absence "unusual circumstances".

Gravity of Fraud

Fraud's are often found to be offences with a high degree of moral blameworthiness as fraud involves a great deal of forethought and conscious effort. It has been called the "thinking person's" crime.

Lawyer or Other Professionals

A "great deal of confidence" is imputed upon lawyers by the public and legislature to hold onto large sums of money. They should not be seen as getting lesser penalties or else it will harm the reputation of the profession.

Social Assistance Fraud

It is suggested that the "paramount consideration" whether dealing with fraud against welfare authorities is deterrence. It has also been said that the focus should be upon "protection of the public."

Defrauding publicly funded programs "corrodes the public's attitude to such forms of assistance -- and hence so undermines them."

Factors

Section 380.1 states aggravating factors relating to fraud:

Sentencing — aggravating circumstances

380.1 (1) Without limiting the generality of section 718.2 [facteurs de détermination de la peine], where a court imposes a sentence for an offence referred to in sections 380 [fraude], 382 [manipulation de bourse], 382.1 [délit d'initié] and 400 [false prospectus], it shall consider the following as aggravating circumstances:

(a) the value of the fraud committed exceeded one million dollars;

(b) the offence adversely affected, or had the potential to adversely affect, the stability of the Canadian economy or financial system or any financial market in Canada or investor confidence in such a financial market;

(c) the offence involved a large number of victims; and

(d) in committing the offence, the offender took advantage of the high regard in which the offender was held in the community.

Aggravating circumstance — value of the fraud

(1.1) Without limiting the generality of section 718.2 [facteurs de détermination de la peine], when a court imposes a sentence for an offence referred to in section 382 [manipulation de bourse], 382.1 [délit d'initié] or 400 [false prospectus], it shall also consider as an aggravating circumstance the fact that the value of the fraud committed exceeded one million dollars.

Non-mitigating factors

(2) The court shall not consider as mitigating circumstances the offender’s employment, employment skills or status or reputation in the community if those circumstances were relevant to, contributed to, or were used in the commission of the offence.

Record of proceedings

(3) The court shall cause to be stated in the record the aggravating and mitigating circumstances it took into account when determining the sentence.
2004, c. 3, s. 3; 2011, c. 6, s. 3.
[annotation(s) ajoutée(s)]

– CCC (CanLII), (Jus.)

---

Aggravating

Aggravating factors for major fraud include:

• breach of trust
• magnitude or size of the fraud
• degree of sophistication, planning and deception
• number of dishonest transactions undertaken in the offence
• Duration of the dishonesty
• number of victims
• vulnerability of the victims
• impact of the fraud upon the victims
• nature and extent of the loss
• efforts to conceal the fraud, including forging of documents
• personal benefit
• the number of people involved and the role of the offender
• greed as sole motivator
• termination of scheme by arrest or voluntarily
• prior record

Character of Victim

Any dishonest attainment of money "is a serious crime with its own effects, even though [the victim] institution on its face seems able to bear the loss."

Breach of Trust

Theft of money by persons entrusted with it in the course of his employment amounts to an abuse of trust within the meaning of s.718.2(a)(iii).

"Large number of victims"

The reference to "large number of victims" under s. 380.1 (1)(c) of the code will include a group of more than 50 people.

Groups a low as 13 people have been considered a "large group."

However, numbers in the range of 4 people is not considered "large."

Greed vs Advancement of Business

While greed as a motivation to fraud is recognized as a aggravating factor to sentence, the use of money to keep a business afloat is a moderate-to-high aggravating factor as well.

Method of Scheme

, ibid., au para 173 ("We agree that cases properly characterized as "scams" will normally call for significantly longer sentences than frauds committed in the course of the operation of a legitimate business.")

Mitigating

Mitigating factors for major fraud include:

• “substantial recovery” of the proceeds of the dishonest conduct
• voluntary repayment of restitution before sentencing
• honest motive, including a medical condition, addiction, or other motivating causes other than greed or financial gain
• major personal impact from offence, such as loss of job
• no record

No prior record is a limited factor since it is a common situation and, at least in relation to major fraud, the offender would have been less likely to have been in the position to commit the offence had the offender had a prior record. Further, the lack of a record is usually trumped by the emphasis on general deterrence.

Good Character

Good character is also of a limited factor as the good character will often help facilitate the offence. The person will often have a place in the community and a good reputation and without which they would not have been able to commit the offence itself.

The good character of well-educated persons who commit offences of major fraud are not of great concern since they are the group that tends to commit these offences the most.

The sentencing process for major fraud is "not really concerned with rehabilitation."

Gambling Addiction

Factors such as the presence of gambling addictions cannot be considered mitigating, however, can have the effect of “[reducing] moral blameworthiness”

Ranges

Alberta

There has been suggestion of three categories of major fraud:

1. non-lawyer trust thefts. These are usually below 250,000 and attract a range of penalty of 18 months to 2 years;
2. dishonest lawyer: the range can be from 12 months to 9 years
3. fraud exceeding a million without trust or lawyers: range between 3 and 6 years.

Ontario

Ontario cases have set the generally accepted range of sentence for major fraud or "complex" frauds at 3 to 6 years.

"Large-scale" fraud will typically be a penitentiary sentence. A conditional sentence will not be appropriate in these cases.

Ordonnances de condamnation accessoires

Ordonnances spécifiques à une infraction

Ordonnances	Condamnation	Description
Ordres ADN	art. 380(1)(a) or (2)	En cas de condamnation en vertu de art. 380(1)(a) and (2), une ordonnance ADN est « discrétionnaire » en tant que secondaire désigné infraction énumérée à l'art. 487.04 (a) ou (b).
Stand-alone Restitution Order - Mandatory consideration under s. 380.3	art. 380
Section 380.2 - Fraud Prohibition Order (section 380.2)	art. 380

Ordonnances générales de détermination de peine

Ordonnance	Condamnation	Description
Ordonnance de non-communication pendant la détention du délinquant (l'art. 743.21)	tout	Le juge a le pouvoir discrétionnaire d'ordonner qu'il soit interdit au contrevenant « de communiquer... avec une victime, un témoin ou une autre personne » pendant sa détention, sauf s'il « estime [qu'il] est nécessaire » de communiquer avec eux.
Ordonnances de restitution (l'art. 738)	tout	Une ordonnance discrétionnaire est disponible pour des éléments tels que la valeur de remplacement de la propriété ; les dommages matériels résultant d'un préjudice, de frais de fuite d'un conjoint ; ou certaines dépenses découlant de la commission d'une infraction aux articles 402.2 ou 403.
Suramende pour la victime (l'art. 737)	tout	Une surtaxe discrétionnaire au titre de l'art. 737 de 30 % de toute amende imposée, de 100 $ par déclaration de culpabilité par procédure sommaire ou de 200 $ par déclaration de culpabilité par acte criminel. Si l'infraction survient à compter du 23 octobre 2013, l'ordonnance comporte des montants minimums plus faibles (15 %, 50 $ ou 100 $).

Ordonnances générales de confiscation

Confiscation	Condamnation	Description
Confiscation des produits de la criminalité (art. 462.37(1) ou (2.01))	tout	Lorsque la culpabilité est établie pour un acte criminel en vertu du Code ou de la LRCDAS et que les biens sont des " produits de la criminalité " et que l'infraction a été " commise à l'égard de ces biens ", les biens sont confisqués au profit de Sa Majesté le Roi à la demande de la Couronne. NB : ne s'applique pas aux infractions sommaires.
L'amende tenant lieu de confiscation (art. 462.37(3))	tout	Lorsqu'une Cour est convaincue qu'une ordonnance de confiscation des produits de la criminalité en vertu de l'article 462.37(1) ou (2.01) peut être rendue, mais que les biens ne peuvent pas être "soumis à une ordonnance", la Cour "peut" ordonner une amende d'un "montant égal à la valeur des biens". En cas de non-paiement de l'amende, un jugement par défaut imposant une période d'incarcération sera rendu.
La confiscation d'armes et d'armes à feu (art. 491). 491)	tout	Lorsqu'il y a déclaration de culpabilité pour une infraction où une "arme, une imitation d'arme à feu, un dispositif prohibé, toute munition, toute munition prohibée ou une substance explosive a été utilisée lors de la commission de [l'] infraction et que cette chose a été saisie et détenue", ou "qu'une personne a commis une infraction qui implique, ou dont l'objet est une arme à feu, une arbalète, une arme prohibée, une arme à autorisation restreinte, un dispositif prohibé, des munitions, des munitions prohibées ou une substance explosive a été saisi et détenu, que l'objet est une arme énumérée ou que l'objet connexe est lié à l'infraction", alors il y aura une ordonnance de confiscation "obligatoire". Cependant, en vertu de l'article 491(2), si le propriétaire légitime "n'a pas participé à l'infraction" et que le juge n'a "aucun motif raisonnable de croire que l'objet serait ou pourrait être utilisé pour commettre une infraction", l'objet doit être restitué au propriétaire légitime.
Confiscation de biens infractionnels (art. 490. 1)	tout	En cas de déclaration de culpabilité pour un acte criminel, " tout bien est un bien infractionnel " lorsque a) un acte criminel est commis en vertu de la présente loi ou de la Loi sur la corruption d'agents publics étrangers, b) il est utilisé de quelque manière que ce soit dans le cadre de la perpétration d'une telle infraction, ou c) il est destiné à être utilisé dans le cadre de la perpétration d'une telle infraction. Ces biens doivent être confisqués au profit de Sa Majesté du chef de la province. NB : ne s'applique pas aux infractions sommaires.

Suspensions de casier et pardons

Les condamnations au titre de art. 380 peuvent faire l'objet d'une suspension du casier conformément aux articles 3 et 4 de la Loi sur le casier judiciaire 5 ans après l'expiration de la peine pour les infractions punissables sur déclaration de culpabilité par procédure sommaire et 10 ans après l'expiration de la peine pour toutes les autres infractionl'art. Le délinquant ne peut pas voir son casier suspendu s'il a été (1) reconnu coupable d'au moins trois infractions passibles d'une peine maximale d'emprisonnement à perpétuité, et (2) pour chacune de ces trois infractions, il a été "condamné à une peine d'emprisonnement de deux ans ou plus".(Traduit par Google Traduction)

History of the Offence

• History of Fraud Offences

Voir également

• Identity Theft (Offence)
• Theft (Offence)
• Miscellaneous Fraudulent Offences

References

• Pre-Trial and Trial Motions Checklist

• UK Sentencing Guidelines for Fraud