How Do Tactics At A Criminal Trial Affect A Related Civil Trial?

The Supreme Court of Canada has recently ruled that s. 13 of the Charter does not preclude the use of prior testimony in all circumstancesThe choices of trial tactics made at the criminal trial may affect the result of the civil action. For example, a man named deBrouwer who was found guilty of assault causing bodily harm against a man named Weber.  At his civil trial, he attempted to plead self-defense. He argued that, as he had not led evidence in his defense on the criminal charges, the issue of self-defense had not been considered by the criminal court.  The judge presiding at the civil case struck out his statement of defense and ordered that he file an amended statement of defense that stated that he did not take issue with what was decided by the criminal court. See Weber v. deBrouwer, 2009 BCSC 1613.

Other cases have held, however, that a court should usually have something more than a simple certificate at conviction to rely upon. See Smith v. Doucette, 2005 NSSC 327.

Click to read more ...

Examination of Justices Moldaver and Karakatsanis Before The Ad Hoc Committee On The Appointment Of Supreme Court Of Canada Justices

Judges Sitting In The Supreme Court Of CanadaA relatively new development in Canadian politics is the public examination of the Prime Minister's nominees for appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada. The process is recorded, and published both in transcripts and in video. As you will see in the video below, proficiency in both official languages and depth of judicial experience are important issues at the federal level.

Click to read more ...

SCC Says Prosecutor's Withdrawal From Plea Agreement Not Reviewable

SCC Emphasizes That Repudiation Of Plea Agreements Should Be RareThe SCC has ruled that the decision of Alberta's Acting Assistant Deputy Minister in the Attorney General's Office to withdraw from a plea agreement and proceed to trial was not reviewable, as it was a matter of prosecutorial discretion and not an abuse of process. The decision is cited as R. v. Nixon, 2011 SCC 34.

From the headnote:

The accused drove her motor home through an intersection and struck another vehicle, killing a husband and wife and injuring their young son. 

Click to read more ...

Past Recollection Recorded

Criminal lawyers can ask witnesses about past recollection recorded.Nobody's memory is perfect. Sometimes, a criminal defense lawyer questions a witness who has no memory of the incident in question, but who recorded notes about it at some earlier time, when he or she did remember the incident. Criminal lawyers call that "past recollection recorded".

Click to read more ...

Can Lawyers Criticize Judges?

Later this winter, the Supreme Court of Canada will consider the issue of the extent to which lawyers can publicly criticize judges, in a case on appeal from Quebec called Dore v. Bernard, 2010 QCCA 24.

Gilles Dore, a criminal lawyer, appeared in front of Justice Jean-Guy Boilard at a bail hearing in 2001. The judge told Mr. Dore that his his argument was completely ridiculous and full of overblown rhetoric and hyperbole.

Click to read more ...

Right to Privacy and Electrical Usage Records

The SCC has held that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy over the data revealing the electrical consumption patterns in a residence, unless the resident has asserted a privacy interest.

In R. v. Gomboc, [2010] SCJ No. 55, a majority of seven judges held that the police did not violate Mr. Gomboc's right to be free from unreasonable search when they enlisted the assistance of Gomboc's electricity company and installed a digital recording ammeter (DRA) to record the pattern of consumption of electricity in his home. The DRA was installed in a transformer on public property, without a warrant.

Four of the seven judges held that the information was not sufficiently private to qualify as a search. Therefore, the Charter protection did not arise. Three of the seven judges in the majority held that the information revealed by the DRA could be private, but that because Mr. Gomboc did not instruct his electricity provider that the information should be kept private, he had no expectation of privacy. The two dissenting judges held that the information was private, whether the customer told his electricity provider to keep the information private or not.

Although Mr. Gomboc lost his appeal, the decision supports the proposition that we have an expectation of privacy in our electrical usage records. On that critical issue, 5 of the 9 judges were in agreement.

Momentary Lapse of Attention is NOt Criminal: R. v. Beatty

In the recent Supreme Court of Canada case of R v. Beatty, it was held that drivers who commit "momentary acts of negligence" should not be held criminally responsible for their mistakes -- even if there are devastating consequences. In the case at hand, Justin Beatty was driving his pickup truck on the Trans-Canada Highway near Chase, B.C., on a clear summer day when the truck briefly crossed the centre line of the road and collided with an oncoming car, killing three women inside.

At the scene, a stunned Beatty told police and paramedics that he may have lost consciousness due to heatstroke, after working all day in the sun. There was no evidence of intoxication, and witnesses driving behind Beatty said his truck had been driven normally, at the legal speed, before the crash. 

The court stated that, "The heavy sanctions and stigma that follow from a criminal offence should not be visited upon a person for a momentary lapse of attention."

The court recognized that he made a split-second mistake that is all too common on Canada's roads.