R. v. James (G.H.), 2014 SCC 5

JudgeLeBel, Rothstein, Moldaver, Karakatsanis and Wagner, JJ.
CourtSupreme Court (Canada)
Case DateJanuary 17, 2014
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations2014 SCC 5;[2014] N.R. TBEd. JA.010;[2014] 1 SCR 80
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
15 practice notes
  • Mahjoub c. Canada (Citoyenneté et Immigration),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • July 19, 2017
    ...and Liberty et al. v. National Energy Board et al., [1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, (1976), 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716.DISTINGUISHED:R. v. Carosella, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 80, 142 D.L.R. (4th) 595.CONSIDERED:Mahjoub (Re), 2013 FC 1094; Mahjoub (Re), 2013 FC 1095; Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. ......
  • R v Mehari, 2020 SKCA 37
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • March 31, 2020
    ...relying on assumptions and stereotypes, it is also an error to reject otherwise admissible relevant evidence. In this regard, in R v James, 2014 SCC 5, [2014] 1 SCR 80 (affirming R v James, 2013 BCCA 159, 297 CCC (3d) 106), Moldaver J. found the trial judge to have erred because he “failed ......
  • R. v. F.I.,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • October 8, 2021
    ...evidence of V.O.’s behaviour after the incident. This evidence is relevant to an assessment of her credibility. See: R v James, 2014 SCC 5 at para 5, [2014] 1 SCR 80. [90]                   ......
  • R. v. Richards (C.B.), 2016 ABQB 176
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
    • March 22, 2016
    ...the Supreme Court applied the exceptional circumstance standard to determine whether the delay to counsel was justified in R v Mian , 2014 SCC 5 at para 74. I am inclined to endorse the latter standard, as it is more consistently applied in case law and was applied in early 10(b) jurisprude......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
  • Mahjoub c. Canada (Citoyenneté et Immigration),
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Canada)
    • July 19, 2017
    ...and Liberty et al. v. National Energy Board et al., [1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, (1976), 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716.DISTINGUISHED:R. v. Carosella, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 80, 142 D.L.R. (4th) 595.CONSIDERED:Mahjoub (Re), 2013 FC 1094; Mahjoub (Re), 2013 FC 1095; Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. ......
  • R v Mehari, 2020 SKCA 37
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan)
    • March 31, 2020
    ...relying on assumptions and stereotypes, it is also an error to reject otherwise admissible relevant evidence. In this regard, in R v James, 2014 SCC 5, [2014] 1 SCR 80 (affirming R v James, 2013 BCCA 159, 297 CCC (3d) 106), Moldaver J. found the trial judge to have erred because he “failed ......
  • R. v. F.I.,
    • Canada
    • Court of Queen's Bench of Saskatchewan (Canada)
    • October 8, 2021
    ...evidence of V.O.’s behaviour after the incident. This evidence is relevant to an assessment of her credibility. See: R v James, 2014 SCC 5 at para 5, [2014] 1 SCR 80. [90]                   ......
  • R v Williams,
    • Canada
    • Superior Court of Justice of Ontario (Canada)
    • February 28, 2024
    ...three” as long as the connection is not “too tenuous or remote”: R. v. Wittwer, 2008 SCC 33, [2008] 2 S.C.R. 235, at para. 21; R. v. Mack, 2014 SCC 5, [2014] 3 S.C.R. 3, at para. 38; R. v. Pino, 2016 ONCA 389, 130 O.R. (3d) 561, at paras. 56, 72. Courts have adopted a purposive approach to ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 firm's commentaries

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT