R. v. Chase (D.), (1987) 82 N.B.R.(2d) 229 (SCC)

• Judge: Dickson, C.J.C., Beetz, McIntyre, Chouinard, Lamer, Wilson and Le Dain, JJ.
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)
• Case Date: April 25, 1986
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1987), 82 N.B.R.(2d) 229 (SCC);45 DLR (4th) 98;80 NR 247;208 APR 229;59 CR (3d) 193;1987 CanLII 23 (SCC);37 CCC (3d) 97;[1987] SCJ No 57 (QL);3 WCB (2d) 75;82 NBR (2d) 229;[1987] 2 SCR 293;[1987] CarswellNB 25

R. v. Chase (D.) (1987), 82 N.B.R.(2d) 229 (SCC);

    82 R.N.-B.(2e) 229; 208 A.P.R. 229

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Her Majesty the Queen v. Dalton Chase

(18846)

Indexed As: R. v. Chase (D.)

Supreme Court of Canada

Dickson, C.J.C., Beetz, McIntyre, Chouinard, Lamer, Wilson and Le Dain, JJ.

October 15, 1987.

Summary:

The 40 year old male accused struggled with a 15 year old girl, grabbing her by the arms, shoulders and breasts. The New Brunswick Provincial Court convicted the accused of sexual assault contrary to s. 246.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code and sentenced him to eight months' imprisonment. The accused appealed.

The New Brunswick Court of Appeal, in a decision reported in 55 N.B.R.(2d) 97; 144 A.P.R. 97; 13 C.C.C.(3d) 187; 40 C.R.(3d) 282, allowed the appeal on the ground that the offence of sexual assault was not established. The court, however, substituted a verdict of common assault and imposed a sentence of six months' imprisonment. The Crown appealed.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction for common assault and restored the conviction for sexual assault. The Supreme Court affirmed the sentence of six months' imprisonment.

Criminal Law - Topic 665

Sexual offences - Sexual assault - What constitutes - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the test for the recognition of sexual assault does not depend solely on contact with specific areas of the human anatomy - The court also held that sexual assault need not involve an attack by a member of one sex upon a member of the other; it could be perpetrated upon one of the same sex - Further, the offence of "sexual assault" in the Criminal Code as amended is a new offence and does not merely duplicate the offences it replaces - Therefore, the definition of "sexual assault" is not limited to the scope of the previous sections - See paragraph 9.

Criminal Law - Topic 665

Sexual offences - Sexual assault - What constitutes - The Supreme Court of Canada held that sexual assault is an assault within any one of the definitions of that concept in s. 244 (1) of the Criminal Code which is committed in circumstances of a sexual nature, such that the sexual integrity of the victim is violated - The test to be applied in determining whether the impugned conduct has the requisite sexual nature is an objective one: "viewed in the light of all the circumstances, is the sexual or carnal context of the assault visible to a reasonable observer" - The part of the body touched, the nature of the contact, the situation in which it occurred, the words and gestures accompanying the act, and all other circumstances surrounding the conduct, including threats which may or may not be accompanied by force, will be relevant - The intent or purpose of the perpetrator may also be a factor - If the accused's motive is sexual gratification, it may be a factor - See paragraph 11.

Criminal Law - Topic 665

Sexual offences - Sexual assault - What constitutes - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the grabbing of a woman's breasts constituted a sexual assault - See paragraph 13.

Criminal Law - Topic 669

Sexual offences - Sexual assault - Intention or mens rea - The Supreme Court of Canada held that the offence of sexual assault in s. 246.1(1)(a) of the Criminal Code is an offence of general intent only - See paragraph 12.

Criminal Law - Topic 5932

Sentence - Sexual assault - A 40 year old male first offender grabbed a 15 year old girl's breasts - The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed a sentence of six months' imprisonment on a conviction for sexual assault - See paragraph 13.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Alderton (1985), 7 O.A.C. 121; 49 O.R.(2d) 257 (C.A.), consd. [para. 5].

R. v. Taylor (1985), 59 A.R. 179; 44 C.R.(3d) 263 (C.A.), consd. [para. 6].

R. v. Cook (1985), 20 C.C.C.(3d) 18 (B.C.C.A.), consd. [para. 7].

R. v. Leary, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 29; 13 N.R. 592, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Swietlinski, [1980] 2 S.C.R. 956; 34 N.R. 569, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Bernard (1985), 7 O.A.C. 305; 18 C.C.C.(3d) 574 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 12].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 244 [paras. 1, 4, 11]; sect. 246.1 [paras. 1, 4].

Criminal Code Amendment Act, S.C. 1980-81-82-83, c. 125, generally [para. 4].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Usprich, S.J., A New Crime in Old Battles: Definitional Problems with Sexual Assault (1987), 29 Crim. L.Q. 200 [para. 11].

Boyle, C., Sexual Assault (1984), p. 74 [para. 12].

Counsel:

William J. Corby, for the appellant;

John S. MacPhee, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard before Dickson, C.J.C., Beetz, McIntyre, Chouinard, Lamer, Wilson and Le Dain, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada, on April 25, 1986. The decision of the Supreme Court was delivered by McIntyre, J., in both official languages on October 15, 1987.

Chouinard, J., did not take part in the judgment.