R. v. Gul, 2021 SCC 14
Jurisdiction | Federal Jurisdiction (Canada) |
Judge | Wagner, Richard; Moldaver, Michael J.; Brown, Russell; Rowe, Malcolm; Kasirer, Nicholas |
Citation | 2021 SCC 14 |
Date | 19 April 2021 |
Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
Docket Number | 39414 |
-
- 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
2 practice notes
-
R v Settle,
...error occurred here. [46] This is an error of law that might be reached by s 686(1)(b)(iii) CCC depending on the circumstances: R v Gul, 2021 SCC 14, [2021] SCC No 14 (QL) referring to R v Gul, 2020 QCCA 1557 at para 44, [2020] QJ No 11528 (QL). The majority decision’s condonation of the er......
-
R. v. Cole,
...proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code may be applied, in an appropriate case, to similar fact evidence errors: R. v. Gul, 2021 SCC 14. As I will explain, I see this as an appropriate case to apply the proviso. In my view, notwithstanding the risk of prejudice that extrinsic misc......
2 cases
-
R v Settle,
...error occurred here. [46] This is an error of law that might be reached by s 686(1)(b)(iii) CCC depending on the circumstances: R v Gul, 2021 SCC 14, [2021] SCC No 14 (QL) referring to R v Gul, 2020 QCCA 1557 at para 44, [2020] QJ No 11528 (QL). The majority decision’s condonation of the er......
-
R. v. Cole,
...proviso in s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code may be applied, in an appropriate case, to similar fact evidence errors: R. v. Gul, 2021 SCC 14. As I will explain, I see this as an appropriate case to apply the proviso. In my view, notwithstanding the risk of prejudice that extrinsic misc......