|
R V Zora
''R v Zora'', 2020 SCC 14 is a case in which the Supreme Court of Canada held unanimously that the offence of breaching bail conditions under the ''Criminal Code'' requires subjective ''mens rea''. Background, facts, and procedural history The ''Criminal Code'' defines a number of offences known as administration of justice offences. Such offences concern an accused's behaviour while he or she is involved in the criminal justice system, as opposed to conduct that results in criminal charges in the first instance. ''Zora'' concerns the administration of justice offence of breaching bail conditions: failing to comply with rules the court has set to govern an accused's conduct while the accused is out on bail pending trial. Chaycen Zora had been charged with drug possession under the ''Controlled Drugs and Substances Act'' and was released on bail with several conditions. One of these conditions was that he would answer the door when the police came to check on him. Due to his fai ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
British Columbia Court Of Appeal
The British Columbia Court of Appeal (BCCA) is the highest appellate court in the province of British Columbia, Canada. It was established in 1910 following the 1907 Court of Appeal Act. The BCCA hears appeals from the Supreme Court of British Columbia and a number of boards and tribunals. The BCCA also hears criminal appeals from the Provincial Court of British Columbia where the proceedings in that court were by indictment. It will hear summary conviction appeals from the Supreme Court on criminal matters that originated in the Provincial Court. Statute restricts appeals on civil matters from the Provincial Court (Small Claims) to the Supreme Court. However, some Provincial Court civil matters may come before the BCCA on very narrow matters having to do with questions of administrative law or other unusual circumstances. The BCCA consists of 15 justices (including a Chief Justice) in addition to 9 supernumerary justices. All justices of the BCCA (including the position of C ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Criminal Justice
Criminal justice is the delivery of justice to those who have been accused of committing crimes. The criminal justice system is a series of government agencies and institutions. Goals include the Rehabilitation (penology), rehabilitation of offenders, preventing other crimes, and moral support for victims. The primary institutions of the criminal justice system are the police, Prosecutor, prosecution and Criminal defense lawyer, defense lawyers, the courts and the prisons system. Criminal justice system Definition The criminal justice system consists of three main parts: #Law enforcement agencies, usually the police #Courts and accompanying Prosecutor, prosecution and Criminal defense lawyer, defence lawyers #Agencies for detaining and supervising offenders, such as prisons and probation agencies. In the criminal justice system, these distinct agencies operate together as the principal means of maintaining the rule of law within society. Law enforcement The first contact a ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of Canada Cases
The Supreme Court of Canada is the court of last resort and final appeal in Canada. Cases that are successfully appealed to the Court are generally of national importance. Once a case is decided the Court will publish written reasons for the decision that consist of one or more reasons from any number of the nine justices. Understanding the background of the cases, their reasons and the authorship can be important and insightful as each judge may have varying beliefs in legal theory and understanding. List of cases by Court era * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Richards Court through Fauteux Court): This list includes cases from the formation of the Court on April 8, 1875, through to the retirement of Gérald Fauteux on December 23, 1973. * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Laskin Court): This list includes cases from the rise of Bora Laskin through to his death on March 26, 1984. * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Dickson Court): This list includes cases from t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Drug Withdrawal
Drug withdrawal, drug withdrawal syndrome, or substance withdrawal syndrome, is the group of symptoms that occur upon the abrupt discontinuation or decrease in the intake of pharmaceutical or recreational drugs. In order for the symptoms of withdrawal to occur, one must have first developed a form of drug dependence. This may occur as physical dependence, psychological dependence or both. Drug dependence develops from consuming one or more substances over a period of time. Dependence arises in a dose-dependent manner and produces withdrawal symptoms that vary with the type of drug that is consumed. For example, prolonged use of an antidepressant medication is likely to cause a rather different reaction when discontinued compared to discontinuation of an opioid, such as heroin. Withdrawal symptoms from opiates include anxiety, sweating, vomiting, and diarrhea. Alcohol withdrawal symptoms include irritability, fatigue, shaking, sweating, and nausea. Withdrawal from nicotine can ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Statute
A statute is a formal written enactment of a legislative authority that governs the legal entities of a city, state, or country by way of consent. Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy. Statutes are rules made by legislative bodies; they are distinguished from case law or precedent, which is decided by courts, and regulations issued by government agencies. Publication and organization In virtually all countries, newly enacted statutes are published and distributed so that everyone can look up the statutory law. This can be done in the form of a government gazette which may include other kinds of legal notices released by the government, or in the form of a series of books whose content is limited to legislative acts. In either form, statutes are traditionally published in chronological order based on date of enactment. A universal problem encountered by lawmakers throughout human history is how to organize published statutes. Such publications h ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Statutory Interpretation
Statutory interpretation is the process by which courts interpret and apply legislation. Some amount of interpretation is often necessary when a case involves a statute. Sometimes the words of a statute have a plain and a straightforward meaning. But in many cases, there is some ambiguity in the words of the statute that must be resolved by the judge. To find the meanings of statutes, judges use various tools and methods of statutory interpretation, including traditional canons of statutory interpretation, legislative history, and purpose. In common law jurisdictions, the judiciary may apply rules of statutory interpretation both to legislation enacted by the legislature and to delegated legislation such as administrative agency regulations. History Statutory interpretation first became significant in common law systems, of which historically English law#Common law, England is the exemplar. In Roman and civil law, a statute (or code) guides the magistrate, but there is no jud ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Presumption
In the law of evidence, a presumption of a particular fact can be made without the aid of proof in some situations. The invocation of a presumption shifts the Legal burden of proof, burden of proof from one party to the opposing party in a court trial. There are two types of presumption: ''rebuttable presumption'' and ''conclusive presumption''. A rebuttable presumption is assumed true until a person proves otherwise (for example the presumption of innocence). In contrast, a conclusive (or irrebuttable) presumption cannot be refuted in any case (such as defense of infancy in some legal systems). Presumptions are sometimes categorized into two types: presumptions without basic facts, and presumptions with basic facts. In the United States, mandatory presumptions are impermissible in criminal cases, but permissible presumptions are allowed. An example of presumption without basic facts is presumption of innocence. An example of presumption ''with'' basic facts is Declared death in ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Sault Ste-Marie (City Of)
''R v Sault Ste-Marie (City of)'' 9782 SCR 1299 is a Supreme Court of Canada case where the Court defines the three types of offences that exist in Canadian criminal law and further defines the justification for "public welfare" offences. Background The city of Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, hired Cherokee Disposal to dispose of the city's waste. The city built a disposal site 20 feet from a stream which, when filled by the disposal company, resulted in waste seeping into the stream. The city was charged with discharging, or permitting to be discharged, refuse into the public waterways causing pollution pursuant to section 32(1) of the Ontario ''Water Resources Act''. The issue before the court was whether the city's offence should be classified as strict liability or absolute liability. The Court of Appeal for Ontario held that the charge required proof of ''mens rea'', which on the facts would acquit the defendant. Reasoning In the judgement written by Justice Dickson, the Cour ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Criminal Law Of Canada
The criminal law of Canada is under the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada. The power to enact criminal law is derived from section 91(27) of the ''Constitution Act, 1867''. Most criminal laws have been codified in the ''Criminal Code'', as well as the ''Controlled Drugs and Substances Act'', ''Youth Criminal Justice Act'' and several other peripheral statutes. Prosecution In all Canadian provinces and territories, criminal prosecutions are brought in the name of the " King in Right of Canada". A person may be prosecuted criminally for any offences found in the ''Criminal Code'' or any other federal statute containing criminal offences. There are two basic types of offences. The most minor offences are summary conviction offences. They are defined as "summary" within the Act and, unless otherwise stated, are punishable by a fine of no more than $5,000 and/or 6 months in jail. Examples of offences which are always summary offences include trespassin ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Recklessness (law)
In criminal law and in the law of tort, recklessness may be defined as the state of mind where a person deliberately and unjustifiably pursues a course of action while consciously disregarding any risks flowing from such action. Recklessness is less culpable than malice, but is more blameworthy than carelessness. ''Mens rea'' and ''actus reus'' To commit a criminal offence of ''ordinary'' liability (as opposed to strict liability) the prosecution must show both the ''actus reus'' (guilty act) and ''mens rea'' (guilty mind). A person cannot be guilty of an offence for his actions alone; there must also be the requisite intention, knowledge, recklessness, or criminal negligence at the relevant time. In the case of negligence, however, the ''mens rea'' is implied. Criminal law recognizes recklessness as one of four main classes of mental state constituting ''mens rea'' elements to establish liability, namely: *Intention: intending the action; foreseeing the result; desiring th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Intention (criminal Law)
In criminal law, intent is a subjective state of mind () that must accompany the acts of certain crimes to constitute a violation. A more formal, generally synonymous legal term is : intent or knowledge of wrongdoing. Definitions Intent is defined in English law by the ruling in ''R v Mohan'' 976QB 1 as "the decision to bring about a prohibited consequence" (malum prohibitum). A range of words represents shades of ''intent'' in criminal laws around the world. The mental element, or ''mens rea'', of murder, for example, was historically called malice aforethought. In some jurisdictions transferred intent allows the prosecution for intentional murder if a death occurs in the course of committing an intentional felony. The intent for the felony is transferred to the killing in this type of situation. The language of "malice" is mostly abandoned and intent element of a crime, such as intent to kill, may exist without a malicious motive, or even with a benevolent motive, such as in ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
The Crown
The Crown is the state in all its aspects within the jurisprudence of the Commonwealth realms and their subdivisions (such as the Crown Dependencies, overseas territories, provinces, or states). Legally ill-defined, the term has different meanings depending on context. It is used to designate the monarch in either a personal capacity, as Head of the Commonwealth, or as the king or queen of their realms (whereas the monarchy of the United Kingdom and the monarchy of Canada, for example, are distinct although they are in personal union). It can also refer to the rule of law; however, in common parlance 'The Crown' refers to the functions of government and the civil service. Thus, in the United Kingdom (one of the Commonwealth realms), the government of the United Kingdom can be distinguished from the Crown and the state, in precise usage, although the distinction is not always relevant in broad or casual usage. A corporation sole, the Crown is the legal embodiment of execut ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.jpg "Click for more on -> The Crown")