Stay of Proceedings
Section 24(1) of the Charter vests in trial judges broad discretion in granting “such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances”. It is well established that remedies granted by trial judges under s. 24(1) should be disturbed on appeal only where trial judges misdirect themselves or their decision is so clearly
Read MoreThe Defence of Provocation
The defence of provocation requires that there be a wrongful act or insult of such a nature that it is sufficient to deprive an ordinary person of the power of self‑control and that the accused act on that insult before there was time for her passion to cool. In order to satisfy the objective element
Read MoreSimilar Fact Evidence – Using Your Past Against You
The prior conviction was admissible as “some evidence” linking the appellant to the assault on J.S. In the context of a similar fact application, a prior conviction may be tendered to establish an essential element of the prior offence where that element has been placed in issue. The admissibility of a prior conviction does not depend
Read MoreReasonable Forseability – What is an intervening Act?
Courts have used a number of analytical approaches to determine when an intervening act absolves the accused of legal responsibility for manslaughter. For example, both the “reasonable foreseeability” and the “intentional, independent act” approach may be useful in assessing legal causation depending on the specific factual matrix. These approaches grapple with the issue of the
Read MoreDangerous Driving Causing Death
Dangerous driving causing death, a serious criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, consists of two components: prohibited conduct — operating a motor vehicle in a dangerous manner resulting in death — and a required degree of fault — a marked departure from the standard of care that a reasonable person would
Read MoreWhat constitutes Contempt of Court?
The exception in s. 127 of the Criminal Code will be triggered where Parliament or a legislature has provided a legal foundation for the court’s power to issue contempt orders, defined the circumstances in which a person will be found in contempt, and provided a specific punishment or mode of proceeding. On the basis of R. v. Clement,
Read MoreSelf‑induced intoxication and the Defence to an offence against the bodily integrity of another person
A court must consider the specific principles that govern the insanity defence in order to determine whether s. 16 Cr. C. is applicable. If that defence does not apply, the court can then consider whether the defence of self‑induced intoxication under s. 33.1 Cr. C. is applicable if it is appropriate to do so on
Read MoreDefendant Not Bound by Informer Priviledge
The duty to protect and enforce informer privilege rests on the police, the Crown, and the courts. The latter must not disclose any information that would tend to reveal an informer’s identity. However, the defence is not bound by any such duty in undertaking its own investigation independently of the courts and the prosecution. The
Read MoreThe Offender’s Ability to Pay a Court Fine
The legislative purpose behind s. 734(2) of the Criminal Code is to prevent offenders from being fined amounts that they are truly unable to pay, and to correspondingly reduce the number of offenders who are incarcerated in default of payment. A court may impose a fine only if satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that the offender has the
Read MoreItalian Seismologists to Stand Trial on Manslaughter Charges
September 28th, 2011 by Joseph Marcus In what has been described as a “medieval-style attack on science,” Italian prosecutors have charged six seismologists and one public official with manslaughter for their role in an earthquake that devastated the town of L’Aquila. The 6.3-magnitude earthquake took the town by surprise on April 9, 2009, resulting in over
Read More