The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld the conviction of an Edmonton man charged with luring someone he believed was a 13-year-old boy on the internet for sex.

In fact, Michell Rayal Levigne of Edmonton was having online conversations with an undercover police officer.

At issue in the top court's decision was the extent to which internet users must go to confirm the age of the person they're chatting with when an online conversation turns to sex.

Levigne was acquitted of internet luring in 2008, a decision overturned by the Alberta Court of Appeal.

Levigne appealed the Court of Appeal's decision to the Supreme Court to overturn his conviction, and establish how much responsibility internet users have to confirm the ages of the people they interact with online.

Levigne was charged after having online conversations, including about oral sex, with the officer posing as a 13-year-old boy.

Levigne argued he didn't believe the boy was 13 because he typed too fast and his profile said he was 18. The conversations took place in an adult internet chat room.

However, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Levigne did not take reasonable steps to confirm that he was chatting with an adult, and that his conviction stands.

"The reasonable steps invoked by the accused were in fact neither reasonable nor steps to ascertain the age of the person with whom he was communicating by computer for the avowed purpose of his own sexual gratification," Justice Morris J. Fish wrote.

"Rather, they were circumstances which explain why he in fact took no steps to ascertain the actual age of [the person he was chatting with]. And this despite the latter’s repeated assertion that he was only 13."

Now it's up to a lower court to decide whether Levigne goes to jail and what his sentence will be.