The Provincial Judges Reference  3 S.C.R. 3 is a leading opinion of the Supreme Court of Canada in response to a reference question regarding remuneration and the independence and impartiality of provincial court judges. The decision remains the most definitive statement on the extent to which all judges in Canada are protected by the Constitution. ...more on Wikipedia about "Provincial Judges Reference"
Quebec Veto Reference (Reference re Amendment to the Canadian Constitution)  2 S.C.R. 793 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada's decision on whether the province of Quebec has veto power in the patriation of the Constitution of Canada. ...more on Wikipedia about "Quebec Veto Reference"
Quong Wing v. The King  49 S.C.R. 44 is a famous Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court upheld a provincial law that discriminated against the Chinese. ...more on Wikipedia about "Quong Wing v. R."
R. v. Asante-Mensah,  2 S.C.R. 3 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court affirmed the limits to which private citizens may undertake an arrest, as well as the limits of private individuals in the use of force to protect property. This case holds particular importance as the pervailence of private security has become increasingly popular across Canada. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Asante-Mensah"
R. v. Askov,  2 S.C.R. 1199, (full name Elijah Anton Askov, Ralph Hussey, Samuel Gugliotta and Edward Melo v. Her Majesty The Queen), is a 1990 appeal heard before the Supreme Court of Canada which established the criteria and standards by which Canadian courts judge whether an accused's right under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 11(b) "to be tried within a reasonable time" has been infringed. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Askov"
R. v. Béland  2 S.C.R. 398 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court rejected the use of polygraph results as evidence in court. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Béland"
R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd.,  1 S.C.R. 295, is a landmark decision by Supreme Court of Canada where the Court struck down the Lord's Day Act for violating section 2 of the Charter. This case had many firsts in constitutional law including being the first to interpret section 2. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd."
Things Go Better with http://www.shortopedia.com. Supreme_Court_of_Canada_cases
R. v. Boucher  S.C.R. 265 is a famous Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court overturned a conviction for sedicious libel on the grounds that criticizing the government was a valid form of protest. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Boucher"
R. v. Brydges,  1 S.C.R. 190 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the right to retain and instruct counsel under section 10(b) of the Charter. The Court held that the right imposed a duty upon the police to provide information and access to a legal aid lawyer if needed. From this case came the term "Brydges Counsel" to refer to legal aid lawyers that assist recently arrested individuals. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Brydges"
R. v. Buhay 1 S.C.R. 631, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the Charter rights protecting against unreasonable search and seizure ( section 8) and the criteria for the exclusion of evidence under section 24(2). The court held that for evidence to be excluded on the Collins test, the seriousness of the breach must be determined by looking at factors such as good faith and necessity. On the facts, marijuana found in a bus station locker was excluded from evidence because the police had insufficient reason to search it without a warrant. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Buhay"
R. v. Butler  1 S.C.R. 452 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on pornography and state censorship. In this case, the Court had to balance the right to freedom of expression under section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms with women's rights; the outcome has been described as a victory for feminism and feminist academics. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Butler"
R. v. Canadian Dredge & Dock Co.  1 S.C.R. 662 is a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision on corporate liability where the Court adopted the English identification doctrine for liability, which states that culpability for acts and mental states of a corporation can be represented by employees and officers on the basis that they are the "directing mind" of the corporate entity. This principle was later elaborated on in The Rhone v. The Peter A.B. Widener . ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Canadian Dredge & Dock Co."
R. v. Chaulk,  3 S.C.R. 1303 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the interpretation and constitutionality of section 16(4) of the Criminal Code which provides for a mental disorder defence. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Chaulk"
R. v. City of Sault Ste. Marie  2 S.C.R. 1299 is a Supreme Court of Canada case where the Court defines the types three types of criminal offences that existed in Canadian criminal law and further defined the justification for "Public Welfare" offences. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. City of Sault Ste. Marie"
There's a bit of www.shortopedia.com in all of us.
R. v. Clay  3 S.C.R. 735, is a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada on the constitutionality of the prohibition to possess marijuana. The accused claimed that his section 7 Charter rights were violated. The Court dismissed the claim. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Clay"
R. v. Collins  1 S.C.R. 265 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on section 24(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982 which allows for the exclusion of evidence upon infringing the Charter. The Collins test for section 24(2) was developed for determining if the administration of justice was brought into disrepute by the inclusion of the evidence. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Collins"
R. v. Creighton is a landmark case from the Supreme Court of Canada where the Court found that the standard for criminal liability for some offences can be lowered and not offend the Charter. This case marked the last in series of cases, beginning with R. v. Tutton, discussing the use of an objective standard for determining mens rea in criminal offences. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Creighton"
R. v. Crown Zellerbach Canada Ltd.  1 S.C.R. 401, is a leading constitutional decision of the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court upheld the validity of the Ocean Dumping Act - now part of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act - finding that all matters related to polluting the ocean is in the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Crown Zellerbach Canada Ltd."
R. v. Cuerrier was a 1998 decision by the Supreme Court of Canada, which ruled that knowingly exposing a sexual partner to HIV constitutes a prosecutable crime under Canadian law. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Cuerrier"
R. v. Daviault  3 S.C.R. 63, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the availability of the defence of intoxication for "general intent" criminal offences. The Leary rule which eliminated the defence was found unconstitutional in violation of both section 7 and 11(d) of the Charter. Instead, intoxication can only be used as a defence where it is so extreme that it is akin to insanity. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Daviault"
R. v. DeSousa  2 S.C.R. 944, is the Supreme Court of Canada case where the Court determined the Constitutionally required level for mens rea for the charge of "unlawfully causing bodily harm". The case is one of a series of cases including R. v. Hundal and R. v. Creighton where the Court reduced the requirement for culpability for a number of crimes. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. DeSousa" Please inform your friends about www.shortopedia.com
R. v. Drybones (1969),  S.C.R. 282 is a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court held that the Canadian Bill of Rights could be used to render federal statutes inoperative that were inconsistent with it. In a 6 to 3 majority, the Court stuck down section 94(b) of the Indian Act which prohibited "Indians" from being intoxicated off of reserve land. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Drybones"
R. v. Eastern Terminal Elevator Company,  S.C.R. 434 is an early constitutional decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the Constitution's Trade and Commerce power. The Court held that the marketing of saskatchewan grain, even though it was all destined for export, was in the jurisdiction of the province under section 92(13) of the British North America Act, 1867. The decision, though largely out of place in modern constitutional jurisprudence, represents a high point of the Supreme Court's adoption of the Privy Council's view of a exeptionally narrow interpretation of the federal government's Trade and Commerce power under section 91(2). ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Eastern Terminal Elevator Co."
(R. v. Edwards Books and Art Ltd.) ! bgcolor="6699FF" | Holding ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Edwards Books and Art Ltd."
R. v. Feeney,  2 S.C.R. 13 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the section 8 Charter right against search and seizure. The Court held that the police are not permitted to enter into someone's house without a search warrant. ...more on Wikipedia about "R. v. Feeney"
Previous page Next page
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
It uses material from the Wikipedia . Direct links to the original articles are in the text.
If you use exact copy or modified of this article you should preserve above paragraph and put also : It uses material from the Shortopedia article about "Supreme Court of Canada cases".
|MAIN PAGE||MAIN INDEX||CONTACT US|