|
R. V. Starr
''R v Starr'' 0002 SCR 144 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision that re-evaluated several principles of evidence. In particular, they held the "principled approach" hearsay evidence under ''R v Khan'' and ''R v Smith'' (1992) can be equally used to exclude otherwise admissible hearsay evidence. In addition, the Court examined the judge's charge to the jury on the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. Background In August 1994, Bernard Cook and Darlene Weselowski were drinking with Robert Dennis Starr in a hotel near Winnipeg. In the late hours of the night Starr parted ways with Cook and Weselowski. Together, Cook and Weselowski were approached by Jodie Giesbrecht, a sometimes girlfriend of Cook. During an ensuing conversation Cook told Giesbrecht that he could not go with her that night because he had to "go and do an Autopac scam with Robert", as he had been given $500 for wrecking a car for insurance purposes. A few hours later the bodies of both Cook and Weselowski ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Antonio Lamer
Joseph Antonio Charles Lamer (July 8, 1933 – November 24, 2007) was a Canadian lawyer, jurist and the 16th Chief Justice of Canada. Career Lamer practised in partnership at the firm of Cutler, Lamer, Bellemare and Associates and was a full professor in the Faculty of Law, Université de Montréal, where he was also a lecturer in criminology. On December 19, 1969, at the age of 36, he was appointed to the Quebec Superior Court and to the Queen's Bench (Crown Side) of the province of Quebec. In 1978, he was elevated to the Quebec Court of Appeal and was appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada in 1980. Brian Mulroney named Lamer as Chief Justice on July 1, 1990. On January 7, 2000, Lamer took an unexpected early retirement after having served as chief justice for ten years. Several years after his death, former judges spoke about the situation surrounding his retirement. According to a 2011 article in ''The Globe and Mail'', in February 1999, a "delegation of three veteran ju ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Beverley McLachlin
Beverley Marian McLachlin (born September 7, 1943) is a Canadian jurist and author who served as the 17th chief justice of Canada from 2000 to 2017. She is the longest-serving chief justice in Canadian history and the first woman to hold the position. In July 2018, McLachlin began a three-year term as a non-permanent judge on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, the first Canadian jurist nominated to the post. She was re-appointed for a second three-year term in 2021. Early life and education McLachlin was born Beverley Gietz in Pincher Creek, Alberta, the eldest child of Eleanora Marian (née Kruschell) and Ernest Gietz. Her parents, who were of German descent, were "fundamentalist Christians" of the Pentecostal Church. She received a B.A. and an M.A. in philosophy as well as an LL.B. degree (winning the gold medal as top student, and serving as notes editor of the ''Alberta Law Review'') from the University of Alberta. She was called to the bar of Alberta in 1969, and to th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Lifchus
''R v Lifchus'', 9973 SCR 320 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the legal basis of the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard for criminal law. Cory J outlined several core principles of the reasonable doubt standard and provided a list of points that must be explained to a jury when they are to consider the standard. Background William Lifchus was a stockbroker who misrepresented the value of a bond in his personal margin account to his employer, defrauding it of a substantial amount of money. He was charged with fraud and theft of over $1,000. Lifchus was convicted of fraud before a jury. He appealed on the ground that the jury was misinstructed about the standard of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". There were four issues before the Court: 1) Must a trial judge provide the jury with an explanation of the expression "reasonable doubt"? 2) If so, how should this concept be explained to the jury? 3) Did the charge in this case amount to a misdirection on the mean ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC; french: Cour suprême du Canada, CSC) is the Supreme court, highest court in the Court system of Canada, judicial system of Canada. It comprises List of Justices of the Supreme Court of Canada, nine justices, whose decisions are the ultimate application of Canadian law, and grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal Appeal, appellate courts. The Supreme Court is bijural, hearing cases from two major legal traditions (common law and Civil law (legal system), civil law) and bilingual, hearing cases in both Official bilingualism in Canada, official languages of Canada (English language, English and French language, French). The effects of any judicial decision on the common law, on the interpretation of statutes, or on any other application of law, can, in effect, be nullified by legislation, unless the particular decision of the court in question involves applicatio ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Hearsay
Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from an under-oath witness who is reciting an out-of-court statement, the content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible (the "hearsay evidence rule") unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies. For example, to prove that Tom was in town, a witness testifies, "Susan told me that Tom was in town." Because the witness's evidence relies on an out-of-court statement that Susan made, if Susan is unavailable for cross-examination, the answer is hearsay. A justification for the objection is that the person who made the statement is not in court and thus not available for cross-examination. Note, however, that if the matter at hand is not the truth of the assertion about Tom being in town but the fact that Susan said the specific words, it may be acceptable. For example, it would be acceptable to ask a witness what Susan told them about Tom in a defamati ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Khan
''R v Khan'' 9902 SCR 531 is a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision that began a series of major changes to the hearsay rule and the rules regarding the use of children as witnesses in court. In this case, and subsequently in ''R v Smith'' (1992), '' R v B (KG)'' (1993), '' R v U (FJ)'' (1995), '' R v Starr'' (2000), and finally, '' R v Khelawon'' (2006), the Court developed the “principled approach” to hearsay, where hearsay statements can be admitted if they are sufficiently reliable and necessary. Background In March 1985, Mrs. O and her three-and-half-year-old daughter T went to Dr. Khan for an examination. Khan first examined the daughter in front of her mother, then, while O was changing into hospital gowns in the other room, Khan was alone in his office with T for five to seven minutes. Roughly 15 minutes after leaving Khan's office, the child described to her mother how Khan had sexually assaulted her. A wet spot was found on the sleeve of T's jogging suit, whic ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Smith (1992)
''R v Smith'', 9922 SCR 915 is a leading decision on hearsay by the Supreme Court of Canada. This decision, along with '' R v Khan'' (1990), began what is called the "hearsay revolution", supplementing the traditional categorical approach to hearsay exceptions with a new "principled approach" based on reliability and necessity of testimony. Background Arthur Larry Smith was accused of killing Aritha Monalisa King. It was believed they had both traveled from Detroit to London, Ontario. While in Canada, Smith had asked King to smuggle drugs back for him. She refused and was killed by Smith. At trial, King's mother testified she received four phone calls from her daughter the night of her death. The last call came from near where her body was found. King had told her mother she would be home very soon. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the statements could be admissible as evidence. The trial judge admitted the evidence and Smith was convicted. On appeal, the Court of App ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Beyond A Reasonable Doubt
Beyond a reasonable doubt is a legal standard of proof required to validate a criminal conviction in most adversarial legal systems. It is a higher standard of proof than the balance of probabilities standard commonly used in civil cases, because the stakes are much higher in a criminal case: a person found guilty can be deprived of liberty, or in extreme cases, life, as well as suffering the collateral consequences and social stigma attached to a conviction. The prosecution is tasked with providing evidence that establishes guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in order to get a conviction; failure to do so entitles the accused to an acquittal. This standard of proof is widely accepted in many criminal justice systems, and its origin can be traced to Blackstone's ratio, "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer." In practice Because a defendant is presumed to be innocent, the prosecution has the burden of proving the defendant's guilt on every e ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Autopac
Manitoba Public Insurance Corporation (MPI; french: Société d'assurance publique du Manitoba) is the non-profit Crown corporation which administers public auto insurance, motor vehicle registration, and driver licensing in Manitoba. Established by the Government of Manitoba in 1971, it is headquartered in the provincial capital Winnipeg. MPI has 21 claim centres, two customer service centres in 13 locations across Manitoba. Driver and Vehicle Licensing (DVL) is available through 147 agents in 123 communities, including 100 photo licensing agencies, and mobile testing units that service 69 communities. MPI partners with more than 300 independent insurance brokers in Manitoba. As of fall 2014, MPI offers a Winter Tire Financing Program that allows policy holders to finance new Winter Tires and Rims (along with other approved services) up to a maximum of $2,000.00 for a repayment period of one to four years. Autopac The basic automobile insurance product offered by MPI is known mo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Khelawon
''R v Khelawon'', 2006 SCC 57 is a leading decision by the Supreme Court of Canada on the principled approach to hearsay evidence. Facts Ramnarine Khelawon was accused of aggravated assault, uttering a death threat, assault causing bodily harm, and assault with a weapon. The offences involved five residents of a nursing home, in which Khelawon worked as the manager. Four of the alleged victims died before trial from unrelated causes. The fifth was found incompetent to testify. Two of the deceased complainants, Mr. Skupien and Mr. Dinino, had given videotaped statements to police, concerning the alleged incidents. Since the declarants were deceased, the videotaped statements became hearsay, and the issue for the trial judge was whether or not the statements were reliable enough to be admitted. Courts below The trial judge, Grossi J, "...held that the hearsay statements from each of the complainants were sufficiently reliable to be admitted in evidence, based in large part on ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Legal Burden Of Proof
In a legal dispute, one party has the burden of proof to show that they are correct, while the other party had no such burden and is presumed to be correct. The burden of proof requires a party to produce evidence to establish the truth of facts needed to satisfy all the required legal elements of the dispute. The burden of proof is usually on the person who brings a claim in a dispute. It is often associated with the Latin maxim ''semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit'', a translation of which is: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges." In civil suits, for example, the plaintiff bears the burden of proof that the defendant's action or inaction caused injury to the plaintiff, and the defendant bears the burden of proving an affirmative defense. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor for criminal cases, and the defendant is presumed innocent. If the claimant fails to discharge the burden of proof to prove their case, the claim will be ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
List Of Supreme Court Of Canada Cases (McLachlin Court)
This is a chronological list of notable cases decided by the Supreme Court of Canada from the appointment of Beverley McLachlin as Chief Justice of Canada to her retirement in 2017. 2000–2004 2005–2009 2010–2017 See also * List of notable Canadian Courts of Appeals cases A select number of decisions from the Courts of Appeal have proven to be the leading case law in a number of fields and have subsequently been adopted across all provinces, or else they are famous decisions in their own right. Most frequently the ... {{Supreme Court of Canada (2000-present) ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
