R. v. Kang
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Judge | Honourable Madam Justice Ker |
| Neutral Citation | 2020 BCSC 1151 |
| Docket Number | 29411 |
| Date | 05 August 2021 |
| Citation | 2020 BCSC 1151 |
| Court | Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada) |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
12 practice notes
-
An Overview of Section 8
...from the warrant application in relation to both person A and person B. For a summary of caselaw on point across Canada, see R v Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151. We discuss the process of challenging warrants in more detail in Chapter 5, Section 70 R v Evans, [1996] 1 SCR 8 [Evans]. 71 R v Cole, 2012 ......
-
R v Maric,
...1302, at paras. 134-147; R. v. Frenn, [2021] O.J. No. 2511 (O.C.J.), at para. 49; R. v. Ritchie, 2016 ONSC 1092, at para. 49; R. v. Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151, at para. 197. The cases relied upon by Mr. Brounsuzian are not binding on this court and sit uncomfortably against the appellate jurispru......
-
R v Nguyen,
...may seek excision or exclusion of evidence: R v Croft, 2013 ABQB 716 at paras 8-24; R v Huynh, 2008 ABQB 464 at paras 47-48; R v Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151 at paras 121-136; R v Maric, 2024 ONCA 665 at para 180-186. As such, these materials have no prima facie relevance to the other 62 Limited ac......
-
2024 ONCA 665,
...1302, at paras. 134-147; R. v. Frenn, [2021] O.J. No. 2511 (O.C.J.), at para. 49; R. v. Ritchie, 2016 ONSC 1092, at para. 49; R. v. Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151, at para. 197. The cases relied upon by Mr. Brounsuzian are not binding on this court and sit uncomfortably against the appellate jurispru......
Get Started for Free
10 cases
-
R v Maric,
...1302, at paras. 134-147; R. v. Frenn, [2021] O.J. No. 2511 (O.C.J.), at para. 49; R. v. Ritchie, 2016 ONSC 1092, at para. 49; R. v. Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151, at para. 197. The cases relied upon by Mr. Brounsuzian are not binding on this court and sit uncomfortably against the appellate jurispru......
-
R v Nguyen,
...may seek excision or exclusion of evidence: R v Croft, 2013 ABQB 716 at paras 8-24; R v Huynh, 2008 ABQB 464 at paras 47-48; R v Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151 at paras 121-136; R v Maric, 2024 ONCA 665 at para 180-186. As such, these materials have no prima facie relevance to the other 62 Limited ac......
-
2024 ONCA 665,
...1302, at paras. 134-147; R. v. Frenn, [2021] O.J. No. 2511 (O.C.J.), at para. 49; R. v. Ritchie, 2016 ONSC 1092, at para. 49; R. v. Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151, at para. 197. The cases relied upon by Mr. Brounsuzian are not binding on this court and sit uncomfortably against the appellate jurispru......
-
R v Saed,
...seized. 181 The Crown says that courts have consistently rejected group rights claims. On this point, counsel point to R. v. Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151 [ Kang Legal Framework for Excision] and subsequently R. v. Latimer, 2020 BCSC 1958 [ Latimer Excision Decision], in addition to the foundation......
Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
-
An Overview of Section 8
...from the warrant application in relation to both person A and person B. For a summary of caselaw on point across Canada, see R v Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151. We discuss the process of challenging warrants in more detail in Chapter 5, Section 70 R v Evans, [1996] 1 SCR 8 [Evans]. 71 R v Cole, 2012 ......
-
Table of cases
...143, 145, 184, 194, 350 R v KA and ASA, 2022 ONSC 1241 ................................................................ 70, 72 R v Kang, 2020 BCSC 1151 ................................................................................... 35 R v Kang, 2020 BCSC 1474 .................................