I received disclosure 2 days prior to the trial, although the information was available to the crown 3 weeks earlier. The officer's notes were illegible, so I requested a typed version, which was not supplied in time for the trial. In discussions with the crown as to a new trial date, she was proposing April XX and we settled on May XX to accommodate my schedule. The crown told the JP that the delay was due to accommodating my schedule and should be charged to the defence, and the JP entered such into the record - is this normal? It doesn't seem fair; most of the delay was due to the crown. At best, the delays are concurrent.

If that's what's on the record now it may be hard to dispute that later, but you could have made the argument that the initial delay (until April) was caused by the crown not providing disclosure in time and that you are only responsible for the delay between April and May.

I don't know if that's entirely accurate for your situation, because it depends on how diligent you were in requesting disclosure, but that's something to think about.