Is there any case law where a challenge to section 7 of section 467.1 of the Criminal Code is heard before the voir dires?

The Respondents argue that an early hearing of the s. 7 challenge would result in fragmentation of the constitutional attack on s. 467.1; a successful challenge to the legislation would result in the trial proceeding being fragmented; even if s. 467.1 is held to be unconstitutional, the accused face a trafficking charge, with respect to which the admissibility of intercepted private communications will have to be litigated; there must be significant reasons for departing from the general rule that constitutional challenges should be considered at the conclusion of the case; it is not clear that hearing the constitutional issue prior to the voir dires will save time; and given recent jurisprudence on s. 467.1 this is not necessarily an “apparently meritorious challenge”. ANALYSIS Vagueness v. Broadness