R v Delmas, 2020 ABCA 152
| Judge | The Honourable Mr. Justice Brian O’Ferrall,The Honourable Madam Justice Elizabeth Hughes,The Honourable Mr. Justice Kevin Feehan |
| Docket Number | 1801-0210-A |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Alberta) |
| Date | 17 April 2020 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
33 practice notes
-
R. v. Kruk, 2024 SCC 7
...(3d) 321; J.P. v. R., 2022 QCCA 104; R. v. Calnen, 2019 SCC 6, [2019] 1 S.C.R. 301; R. v. Munoz (2006), 86 O.R. (3d) 134; R. v. Delmas, 2020 ABCA 152, 452 D.L.R. (4th) 375, aff’d 2020 SCC 39, [2020] 3 S.C.R. 780; R. v. R.R., 2018 ABCA 287, 366 C.C.C. (3d) 293; R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997]......
-
R. v. T.J.F.,
...consideration”, Slatter (2019), para. 118; appellate review should not involve a “word-by-word analysis”, Delmas, 2020 ABCA 152, para. 30; a trial judge does not need to “reconcile every frailty”, Slatter (2019), para. 118; or comment on every inconsistenc......
-
Serinus Energy Plc v SysGen Solutions Group Ltd,
...willingness to speak the truth as the witness believes it be) and reliability (accuracy of an honest witness' evidence): R v Delmas, 2020 ABCA 152 at para 25, citing R v Morrisey, 1995 CanLII 3498 (ONCA), 22 OR (3d) 514. One of the factors a court can consider in assessing credibility ......
-
R v Dirksen,
...Goldfinch were released after the trial judgment, so the trial judge did not have the benefit of these decisions: see also R v Delmas, 2020 ABCA 152 (aff’d 2020 SCC 39). [63] The more fundamental problem with Mr. Dirksen’s argument on this point is his inability to categorize the evidence o......
Request a trial to view additional results
29 cases
-
R. v. T.J.F.,
...consideration”, Slatter (2019), para. 118; appellate review should not involve a “word-by-word analysis”, Delmas, 2020 ABCA 152, para. 30; a trial judge does not need to “reconcile every frailty”, Slatter (2019), para. 118; or comment on every inconsistenc......
-
R v Dirksen,
...Goldfinch were released after the trial judgment, so the trial judge did not have the benefit of these decisions: see also R v Delmas, 2020 ABCA 152 (aff’d 2020 SCC 39). [63] The more fundamental problem with Mr. Dirksen’s argument on this point is his inability to categorize the evidence o......
-
Schuetze v. Pyper,
...would involve relying on unsupported assumptions or stereotypes about how people behave in particular circumstances (see: R. v. Delmas, 2020 ABCA 152 at para. 31, aff’d 2020 SCC 39). For the same reasons, I reject any suggestion by Mr. Pyper that his allegations about Ms. Schue......
-
R v BEM,
...with anecdotal opinion imbricated within it. His remarks, said the applicant’s counsel, were more along the line of R v Delmas, 2020 ABCA 152, at para 31, 452 DLR (4th) 375, appeal dismissed 2020 SCC 39, 401 CCC (3d) 383 (“Triers of fact may rely on “reason and common s......
Request a trial to view additional results