Wingham restaurant owner back in court
HURON COUNTY – Stephen Hill, owner of Buck and Jo’s restaurant in downtown Wingham, was back in court on Apr. 15 for the second part of his appeal hearing.
Hill was convicted on three charges in Feb. 2023: one count of failure to comply with the Health Protection Act, one count of Failure to Produce a Safety Act and one count of Failure to Comply with Getting Proof of Vaccination from Patrons.
The restaurant owner was ordered to pay $5,500 – $1,500 each for not providing a safety plan and not checking for proof of vaccination against COVID-19 and $2,500 for failure to cooperate with Huron Perth Public Health (HPPH) enforcement.
During the first appeal hearing, held on Dec. 6, 2023, Hill reiterated his firm stance that the restaurant was closed between Nov. 5, 2021, and Nov. 12, 2021, when HPPH was scheduled to return to complete their compliance inspection.
Hill’s main argument was that the restaurant was only open for two hours on Nov. 12 to accommodate the HPPH inspectors’ visit, not to provide indoor dining.
In a social media post, Hill expressed his strong belief that he has “overwhelming evidence to support that HPPH was derelict in their duties.”
He pointed the appellant judge back to the video recordings of the HPPH visits that Hill submitted as his evidence in the case, implying that the Justice of the Peace who presided over the original court case made a mistake and the HPPH officers were not truthful.
A lawyer for the HPPH, Gregory Stewart, disagreed. He presented his side to the judge at the Apr. 15 hearing, reiterating his original arguments that Hill was open for business that day as there were people inside the restaurant.
Additionally, the lawyer reminded the court that the video recordings submitted by Hill show that the restaurant owner was intimidating and uncooperative towards the HPPH officers. He also pointed out that Hill’s repeated public statements stating that they would not comply with the government-enforced rules to check vaccination passports were proof of non-compliance.
Stewart cited several case law arguments to the judge, reminding him that the rules for hearing an appeal do not allow the appellant judge to “retry” the case, only to review any violations in law that the original JP may have overlooked.
The appellant judge asked if the court could consider the fact that it has since been proven that vaccination against COVID-19 was ineffective in preventing the virus and that the vaccination passport program was no longer in effect. Stewart replied that the conviction was handed down prior to those findings and should be upheld as it was the law at that time.
The judge chose not to make his decision on that day, stating that he would carefully review Hill’s video evidence and Stewart’s case law studies before reaching a verdict.
The decision will be heard on Jul. 11 at the Goderich Court House and will be available via Zoom.
Cory Bilyea, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, Wingham Advance Times
