R. v. S.H., 2020 SCC 3
| Judge | Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Moldaver, Michael J.; Côté, Suzanne; Brown, Russell; Martin, Sheilah |
| Court | Supreme Court (Canada) |
| Case Date | February 19, 2020 |
| Jurisdiction | Canada (Federal) |
| Citations | 2020 SCC 3 |
-
- 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
5 practice notes
-
R v Settle,
...one considers the trial judge’s reasons as a whole. In the result, no miscarriage of justice occurred.” · The divided decision in R v H(S), 2020 SCC 3, 442 DLR (4th) 181, turned on what was described as an error of law in allowing the Crown to split its case by allowing a re-opening of the ......
-
R. v. Martin,
...The presumption in section 31.3(a) was considered by the Ontario Court of Appeal in R. v. S.H., 2019 ONCA 669, aff’d 2020 SCC 3. In S.H., data extracted from a cell phone, including text messages, was in the possession of the Crown but the witness who used the cell phone was no......
-
R. v. Coban,
...“air of reality” standard: Paciocco, “Proof and Progress” at 204. In R. v. S.H., 2019 ONCA 669, aff’d: 2020 SCC 3 [S.H.], a majority of the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed that the s. 31.3(a) presumption creates a lower threshold than the other subs......
-
Richardson v. R., 2020 NBCA 35
...include: R. v. Durocher, 2019 SKCA 97, [2019] S.J. No. 367 (QL); R. v. S.H., 2019 ONCA 669, [2019] O.J. No. 4438 (QL), aff’d 2020 SCC 3, [2020] S.C.J. No. 3 (QL); R. v. C.B., 2019 ONCA 380, [2019] O.J. No. 2425 (QL); and Ball. In Durocher, the trial judge was not alive to the specifi......
Request a trial to view additional results
4 cases
-
R v Settle,
...one considers the trial judge’s reasons as a whole. In the result, no miscarriage of justice occurred.” · The divided decision in R v H(S), 2020 SCC 3, 442 DLR (4th) 181, turned on what was described as an error of law in allowing the Crown to split its case by allowing a re-opening of the ......
-
R. v. Martin,
...The presumption in section 31.3(a) was considered by the Ontario Court of Appeal in R. v. S.H., 2019 ONCA 669, aff’d 2020 SCC 3. In S.H., data extracted from a cell phone, including text messages, was in the possession of the Crown but the witness who used the cell phone was no......
-
R. v. Coban,
...“air of reality” standard: Paciocco, “Proof and Progress” at 204. In R. v. S.H., 2019 ONCA 669, aff’d: 2020 SCC 3 [S.H.], a majority of the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed that the s. 31.3(a) presumption creates a lower threshold than the other subs......
-
Richardson v. R., 2020 NBCA 35
...include: R. v. Durocher, 2019 SKCA 97, [2019] S.J. No. 367 (QL); R. v. S.H., 2019 ONCA 669, [2019] O.J. No. 4438 (QL), aff’d 2020 SCC 3, [2020] S.C.J. No. 3 (QL); R. v. C.B., 2019 ONCA 380, [2019] O.J. No. 2425 (QL); and Ball. In Durocher, the trial judge was not alive to the specifi......
1 firm's commentaries
-
Reliance Must Be Specifically Pleaded To Assert A Civil Liability Claim In Securities Class Action: Québec Court Of Appeal
...based on the CCQ. Footnotes 1. Nseir c. Barrick Gold Corporation, 2022 QCCA 1718. 2. Desjardins Financial Services Firm Inc. v. Asselin, 2020 SCC 3. 3. Theratechnologies Inc. v. 121851 Canada Inc., 2015 SCC The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject ma......