All Cases

R v Paszczenko; R v Lima – 2010 ONCA 615 (Blair): [27] “Bolus drinking” is generally meant to describe the consumption of large quantities of alcohol immediately or shortly before driving: see Grosse, at p. 788; R. v. Hall (2007), 83 O.R. (3d) 641 (C.A.), at para. 14. See also Phillips at pp. 158-162, for a description of the “relatively Read more...

R v Paszczenko; R v Lima – 2010 ONCA 615 (Blair): [61] It is technically unnecessary to resolve this debate, given the analysis outlined above. I am inclined to the view, however, that courts are entitled to take judicial notice (a) of the fact that the majority of human beings eliminate alcohol in a range of 10-20 milligrams of alcohol Read more...

R v. Whalen, 2010 ONCA 712 (Court): [1] THE COURT:– The conviction on refusing did not depend on accepting the police evidence. The appellant’s own evidence established both the actus reas and mens rea of the offence. The trial judge was entitled to accept this evidence and find, as he did, that the appellant did not want to provide adequate Read more...

R v Dene, 2010 ONCA 796 (Per Curiam – OCA): [4] Assuming, without deciding, that the police did not have reasonable and probable grounds to arrest the appellants, there was still ample evidence to support a valid investigative detention of both appellants. Their behaviour in the taxi was suspicious and evasive. Their posture and body movements indicated that they could Read more...

R v Charlery, 2011 ONSC 2952 (Benotto): [26] Certainly, there is a privacy concern that attaches to contact information. The Crown retains reviewable discretion as to the manner and timing of disclosure where the circumstances are such the disclosure in the usual way may result in harm to any one or prejudice to the public interest As discussed in R. Read more...