R v. Cote – 2018 ONCA 820 (Court):

[38] The trial judge admitted only the second part of Cote’s evidence, that he had never seen McQuhae lose his temper, because it was evidence of McQuhae’s peaceful disposition. For the same reason, the trial judge admitted the evidence of Starr to the effect that McQuhae was generally slow to anger, and the evidence of Eaton to the effect that McQuhae was not of an aggressive nature.

[39] We do not agree that the trial judge erred in admitting the evidence. The evidence admitted was relevant because the appellant had raised and was relying on self-defence. This court has held that evidence of a deceased’s peaceful disposition is relevant to the issue of self-defence, because the jury has to determine if McQuhae acted in a way that caused the accused to fear that his life was in danger or that he would suffer grievous bodily harm: R. v. Krasniqi, 2012 ONCA 561, 291 C.C.C. (3d) 236, at para. 63. Such evidence is therefore admissible where its probative value out-weighs its prejudicial effect: R. v. Krasniqi, at para. 63. The appellant has not persuaded us that, in this case, the prejudice caused by the character evidence required its exclusion.