R v Neilson, 2019 ABCA 403
| Judge | The Honourable Mr. Justice Brian O’Ferrall,The Honourable Madam Justice Michelle Crighton,The Honourable Madam Justice Jo'Anne Strekaf |
| Citation | 2019 ABCA 403 |
| Date | 23 October 2019 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Alberta) |
| Docket Number | 1803-0164-A |
-
- 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
9 practice notes
-
R v D.B.,
...from established facts, because doing so draws a trial judge into the impermissible realms of conjecture and speculation (R v Neilson, 2019 ABCA 403 at para 24 [Neilson]; R v MacIsaac, 2015 ONCA 587 at para 46, 337 OAC 190 [MacIsaac]). It is also an error to base credibility findings on spe......
-
R v Cormier,
...a part of the witness' evidence and to give the witness an opportunity to answer the challenge: SCDY at para 70; R v Neilson, 2019 ABCA 403 at para 41; Lyttle at para 64. It is not some “ossified, inflexible rule of universal and unremitting application that condemns a cross-exa......
-
R v Power,
...take judicial notice of matters that require specialized scientific or medical expertise to understand (see, for example: R v Neilson, 2019 ABCA 403 at para 24; R v Manjra, 2009 ONCA 485 at paras 20–21, 250 OAC 257; and R v Perkins, 2007 ONCA 585 at paras 30-42, 223 CCC (3d) 289), an......
-
R v Soroush et al,
...the inherent improbability of his evidence and its discordance with other evidence adduced at trial. As was stated in R v Neilson, 2019 ABCA 403, “Choosing not to cross-examine a witness, but instead asking the trier of fact to disbelieve a witness based on other evidence adduc......
Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
-
R v D.B.,
...from established facts, because doing so draws a trial judge into the impermissible realms of conjecture and speculation (R v Neilson, 2019 ABCA 403 at para 24 [Neilson]; R v MacIsaac, 2015 ONCA 587 at para 46, 337 OAC 190 [MacIsaac]). It is also an error to base credibility findings on spe......
-
R v Cormier,
...a part of the witness' evidence and to give the witness an opportunity to answer the challenge: SCDY at para 70; R v Neilson, 2019 ABCA 403 at para 41; Lyttle at para 64. It is not some “ossified, inflexible rule of universal and unremitting application that condemns a cross-exa......
-
R v Power,
...take judicial notice of matters that require specialized scientific or medical expertise to understand (see, for example: R v Neilson, 2019 ABCA 403 at para 24; R v Manjra, 2009 ONCA 485 at paras 20–21, 250 OAC 257; and R v Perkins, 2007 ONCA 585 at paras 30-42, 223 CCC (3d) 289), an......
-
R v Soroush et al,
...the inherent improbability of his evidence and its discordance with other evidence adduced at trial. As was stated in R v Neilson, 2019 ABCA 403, “Choosing not to cross-examine a witness, but instead asking the trier of fact to disbelieve a witness based on other evidence adduc......
Request a trial to view additional results