R. v. R.W., (1992) 137 N.R. 214 (SCC)

JudgeCory, McLachlin, Stevenson and Iacobucci, JJ.
CourtSupreme Court of Canada
Case DateJune 11, 1992
JurisdictionCanada (Federal)
Citations(1992), 137 N.R. 214 (SCC);[1992] 2 SCR 122;1992 CanLII 56 (SCC);[1992] 540 AC 164;13 CR (4th) 257;74 CCC (3d) 134;137 NR 214;[1992] CarswellOnt 90;AZ-92111073;JE 92-909;[1992] SCJ No 56 (QL);16 WCB (2d) 304;[1992] ACS no 56;54 OAC 164

R. v. R.W. (1992), 137 N.R. 214 (SCC)

MLB headnote and full text

[French language version follows English language version]

[La version française vient à la suite de la version anglaise]

....................

Her Majesty The Queen (appellant) v. R.W. (respondent)

(21820)

Indexed As: R. v. R.W.

Supreme Court of Canada

La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier,

Cory, McLachlin, Stevenson and

Iacobucci, JJ.

June 11, 1992.

Summary:

The accused youth was convicted on three counts of indecent assault, one count of gross indecency and one count of sexual assault respecting his conduct with three young girls. The accused appealed.

The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and substituted acquittals. The court stated that pursuant to s. 686(1)(a)(i) of the Criminal Code the verdict was unsafe on the evidence given the lack of confirmatory evidence and inconsistencies in the young victims' evidence. The Crown appealed.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and restored the convictions.

Stevenson, J., did not participate in the judgment.

Criminal Law - Topic 4865

Appeals - Indictable offences - Grounds of appeal - Verdict unreasonable or unsupported by evidence - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that in reviewing whether a verdict should be set aside as being unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence (Criminal Code, s. 686(1)(a)(i)) a court of appeal must to some extent re-examine and reweigh the evidence - The court stated that this applied to verdicts based on findings of credibility - The test remained whether a jury or judge, properly instructed and acting reasonably, could have rendered the challenged verdict - However, an appellate court should show great deference to findings of credibility at trial - See paragraphs 15 to 21.

Criminal Law - Topic 4973

Appeals - Indictable offences - Powers of Court of Appeal - Power to review and reweigh evidence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4865 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5020

Appeals - Indictable offences - Setting aside verdicts - Verdict unreasonable or unsupported by evidence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4865 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5461

Evidence - Witnesses - Evidence of children - General - The Supreme Court of Canada discussed how courts should approach the evidence of young children - The court stated that "the repeal of provi­sions creating a legal requirement that children's evidence be corroborated does not prevent the judge or jury from treating a child's evidence with caution where such caution is merited in the circumstances of the case. But it does revoke the assumption formerly applied to all evidence of children, often unjustly, that children's evidence is always less reliable than evi­dence of adults. So if a court proceeds to discount a child's evidence automatically, without regard to the circumstances of the particular case, it will have fallen into an error" - See paragraph 23.

Criminal Law - Topic 5462

Evidence - Witnesses - Evidence of children - Credibility - The Supreme Court of Canada stated that "it may be wrong to apply adult tests for credibility to the evidence of children" - The court stated that credibility of children should be approached on "a 'common sense' basis, taking into account the strengths and weaknesses which char­acterize the evi­dence offered in a particular case. ... In general, where an adult is tes­tifying as to events which occurred when she was a child, her credi­bility should be assessed according to criteria applicable to her as an adult wit­ness. Yet with regard to her evi­dence pertaining to events which occurred in childhood, the presence of inconsis­tencies, particularly as to periph­eral matters such as time and location, should be con­sidered in the context of the age of the witness at the time of the events to which she is testifying" - See para­graphs 24 to 26.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Yebes, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 168; 78 N.R. 351; 36 C.C.C.(3d) 417; 59 C.R.(3d) 108, appld. [para. 16].

R. v. Corbett, [1975] 2 S.C.R. 275; 1 N.R. 258, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Howard, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1337; 96 N.R. 81; 34 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 18].

R. v. P.L.S., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 909; 122 N.R. 321; 90 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 234; 280 A.P.R. 234, refd to. [para. 18].

White v. The King, [1947] S.C.R. 268, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. S.H.M., [1989] 2 S.C.R. 446; 100 N.R. 1; 100 A.R. 321; 50 C.C.C.(3d) 503, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. G.B. et al. (No. 3), [1990] 2 S.C.R. 30; 111 N.R. 62; 86 Sask.R. 142; 77 C.R.(3d) 370, refd to. [para. 24].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, sect. 686(1)(a)(i) [para. 1]; sect. 695 [para. 32].

Criminal Code and Canada Evidence Act, An Act to Amend, S.C. 1987, c. 24, sect. 15 [para. 23].

Counsel:

Catherine A. Cooper, for the appellant;

Robert J. Reynolds, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Attorney General for Ontario, Toronto, Ontario, for the appellant;

Reynolds Kline Selick, Belleville, Ontario, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard on April 2, 1992, before La Forest, L'Heureux-Dubé, Gon­thier, Cory, McLachlin, Stevenson and Iaco­bucci, JJ., of the Supreme Court of Canada.

On June 11, 1992, McLachlin, J., delivered the following judgment in both official languages for the Supreme Court of Canada.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1602 practice notes
  • R. v. Schneider (A.M.) et al., 2004 NSCA 99
    • Canada
    • Nova Scotia Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada)
    • August 17, 2004
    ...601; 165 N.R. 241; 117 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 269; 365 A.P.R. 269; 89 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 29 C.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 93]. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164; 74 C.C.C.(3d) 134; 13 C.R.(4th) 257, refd to. [para. R. v. Patriquin (M.A.) (2004), 221 N.S.R.(2d) 370; 697 A.......
  • R. v. Richer (R.J.), (1993) 141 A.R. 116 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • June 24, 1993
    ...97; 34 C.C.C.(3d) 403 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 58]. R. v. Smithers, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 506; 15 N.R. 287, refd to. [para. 62]. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164, refd to. [para. 65]. R. v. Corbett, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 670; 85 N.R. 81; 64 C.R.(3d) 1; 41 C.C.C.(3d) 385; 28 B......
  • R. v. N.S. et al., (2012) 297 O.A.C. 200 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • December 20, 2012
    ...1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 33, refd to. [para. 25]. White v. R., [1947] S.C.R. 268, refd to. [para. 25]. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164, refd to. [para. 25]. Police v. Razamjoo, [2005] D.C.R. 408 (N.Z.), refd to. [para. 26]. R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 ......
  • R. v. Sylvain (W.), 2014 ABCA 153
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • May 1, 2014
    ...17]. F.H. v. McDougall, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 41; 380 N.R. 82; 260 B.C.A.C. 74; 439 W.A.C. 74; 2008 SCC 53, refd to. [para. 17]. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164, refd to. [para. Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1;......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1490 cases
  • R. v. Schneider (A.M.) et al., 2004 NSCA 99
    • Canada
    • Nova Scotia Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada)
    • August 17, 2004
    ...601; 165 N.R. 241; 117 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 269; 365 A.P.R. 269; 89 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 29 C.R.(4th) 1, refd to. [para. 93]. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164; 74 C.C.C.(3d) 134; 13 C.R.(4th) 257, refd to. [para. R. v. Patriquin (M.A.) (2004), 221 N.S.R.(2d) 370; 697 A.......
  • R. v. Richer (R.J.), (1993) 141 A.R. 116 (CA)
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • June 24, 1993
    ...97; 34 C.C.C.(3d) 403 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 58]. R. v. Smithers, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 506; 15 N.R. 287, refd to. [para. 62]. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164, refd to. [para. 65]. R. v. Corbett, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 670; 85 N.R. 81; 64 C.R.(3d) 1; 41 C.C.C.(3d) 385; 28 B......
  • R. v. N.S. et al., (2012) 297 O.A.C. 200 (SCC)
    • Canada
    • Canada (Federal) Supreme Court (Canada)
    • December 20, 2012
    ...1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1; 2002 SCC 33, refd to. [para. 25]. White v. R., [1947] S.C.R. 268, refd to. [para. 25]. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164, refd to. [para. 25]. Police v. Razamjoo, [2005] D.C.R. 408 (N.Z.), refd to. [para. 26]. R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 ......
  • R. v. Sylvain (W.), 2014 ABCA 153
    • Canada
    • Court of Appeal (Alberta)
    • May 1, 2014
    ...17]. F.H. v. McDougall, [2008] 3 S.C.R. 41; 380 N.R. 82; 260 B.C.A.C. 74; 439 W.A.C. 74; 2008 SCC 53, refd to. [para. 17]. R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122; 137 N.R. 214; 54 O.A.C. 164, refd to. [para. Housen v. Nikolaisen et al., [2002] 2 S.C.R. 235; 286 N.R. 1; 219 Sask.R. 1; 272 W.A.C. 1;......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 firm's commentaries
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (December 2 – December 6, 2019)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • December 11, 2019
    ...2016 ONSC 8038 R. v. U.A., 2019 ONCA 946 Keywords: Criminal Law, Sexual Assault, Sentencing, R. v. Aird, 2013 ONCA 447, R. v. R.W., [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122, R. v. Duncan, 2016 ONCA 754, R. v. Lacasse, 2015 SCC, 64 Criminal Code, s. 719(3.1) R. v. C., 2019 ONCA 953 Keywords: Criminal Law, Arrang......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (May 25 ' 29, 2020)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • June 10, 2020
    ...Sufficiency of Reasons, Criminal Code, ss. 151(a), 153(1)(a), 271, 278, 696(1)(a)(i), R. v. Khan, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 531, R. v. W.(R.), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122, Kienapple v. The Queen, [1975] 1 S.C.R. 729, R. v. Howe (2005), 192 C.C.C. (3d) 480 (Ont. C.A.), R. v. W.H., 2013 SCC 22, R. v. Burke, [1......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (February 7-11, 2022)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • February 15, 2022
    ...Battery, Duty of care, Crown Liability, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Evidence, Witnesses, Reliability, Credibility, R. v. W. (R.), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122, R. v. G.F., 2021 SCC 20, 71 C.R. (7th) 1, R. v. Pindus, 2018 ONCA 55, R. v. Radcliffe, 2017 ONCA 176, R. v. Sanichar, 2012 ONCA 117, rev'd, 20......
  • Court Of Appeal Summaries (February 7-11, 2022)
    • Canada
    • Mondaq Canada
    • February 15, 2022
    ...Battery, Duty of care, Crown Liability, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Evidence, Witnesses, Reliability, Credibility, R. v. W. (R.), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122, R. v. G.F., 2021 SCC 20, 71 C.R. (7th) 1, R. v. Pindus, 2018 ONCA 55, R. v. Radcliffe, 2017 ONCA 176, R. v. Sanichar, 2012 ONCA 117, rev'd, 20......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
103 books & journal articles
  • Rules Relating to the Use of Admissible Evidence
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Law of Evidence. Eighth Edition
    • June 25, 2020
    ...in R v Marks (2000), 48 OR (3d) 161 (CA) at para 22. 35 Ibid. 36 See, e.g., R v Marquard (1993), 25 CR (4th) 1 (SCC). 37 R v W(R) , [1992] 2 SCR 122 at para 23 [ W(R) ]; R v Chahal , 2018 ABCA 132 at paras 52–53. 38 W(R) , above note 37 at 132–34. THE LAW OF EVIDENCE 678 show the untrustwor......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Lawyer’s Guide to the Forensic Sciences
    • June 23, 2016
    ...R. v. W.(D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742, 63 C.C.C. (3d) 397, 1991 CanLII 93 .................................... 322 R. v. W.(R.), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122, 74 C.C.C. (3d) 134, 1992 CanLII 56 .................................... 570 R. v. Wade (1994), 89 C.C.C. (3d) 39, [1994] O.J. No. 543 (C.A.), var......
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Law of Evidence. Eighth Edition
    • June 25, 2020
    ...19 R v W(MC), 2002 BCCA 341 ...............................................................................421 R v W(R), [1992] 2 SCR 122, 74 CCC (3d) 134 .......................................... 530, 677 R v Wabason, 2018 ONCA 187 ...............................................................
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive The Law of Evidence. Revised Fifth Edition
    • September 2, 2008
    ...14 R. v. W.(M.C.), 2002 BCCA 341, 3 C.R. (6th) 64 ................................................. 318 R. v. W.(R.), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 122, 13 C.R. (4th) 257, 74 C.C.C. (3d) 134, 54 O.A.C. 163, 137 N.R. 214, application for re-hearing refused (18 November 1992), [1990] S.C.C.A No. 64 .............
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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