 She distinguished the "James" case, which held that a search or seizure that took place prior to the "Charter" coming into force could not constitute a violation of section 8 of the "Charter".Wilson wrote that in considering section 7 of the "Charter", one must ask whether, at the time of the projected deprivation of the accused's right to liberty, that deprivation would be in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice or not (paragraph 20).She reasoned that since the Charter was in full force and effect at the time of the accused's trial, no issue of retrospectivity was raised.