All Cases
-
Court level: Supreme Court of CanadaDate of decision: 2017/10/19Download decision:Tran v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) – 2017 SCC 50 (Cote): [5] Section 36(1)(a) of the IRPA provides the basis for finding a permanent resident inadmissible to Canada on grounds of “serious criminality”: —36 (1) A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible on grounds of serious criminality for (a) having been convicted in Canada of an Read more...
-
Court level: Supreme Court of CanadaDate of decision: 2017/12/07Download decision:R v. Marakah, 2017 SCC 59 (McLachlin): [54] I conclude that Mr. Marakah’s subjective expectation that his electronic conversation with Mr. Winchester would remain private was objectively reasonable in the totality of the circumstances. Each of the three factors relevant to this inquiry in this case, place, capacity to reveal personal information, and control, support this conclusion. If the place Read more...
-
Court level: Court of AppealDate of decision: 2017/12/26Download decision:R v Cain, [2017] N.S.J. No 512 (CA – Fichaud): [39] I adopt the following explanation of the contextual exception from Justice Paciocco’s article which Mr. Cain cites as seminal (above, para. 33). Paciocco, J.A. (as he now is) said: While the basic rule is simple enough, there are numerous exceptions to that basic rule that complicate the law. An Read more...
-
Court level: Superior CourtDate of decision: 2018/01/20Download decision:R v. AE, 2018 ONSC 471 (Boswell): [1] R.C. BOSWELL J.:– Following a trial in June 2017, I found that the defendant, AE, was, between 2011 and 2015, engaged in a lifestyle that involved significant criminality. He operated as a pimp and exploited two young women; he assaulted both; he criminally harassed one; he trafficked in cocaine and marijuana; and Read more...
-
Court level: Court of AppealDate of decision: 2018/04/05Download decision:R v AC – 2018 ONCA 333 (Hourigan): [37] Like a trial judge’s decision on a severance application, a trial judge’s ruling in relation to where an accused sits during his trial is discretionary, and this court should begin from a place of deference: R. v. Lalande (1999), 138 C.C.C. (3d) 441 (Ont. C.A.). While the default placement of an Read more...
