R. v. Sipes (D.G.) et al., [2012] B.C.T.C. Uned. 351 (SC)
| Judge | Smart, J. |
| Court | Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada) |
| Case Date | March 09, 2012 |
| Jurisdiction | British Columbia |
| Citations | [2012] B.C.T.C. Uned. 351 (SC);2012 BCSC 351;[2012] B.C.T.C. Uned. 351 |
-
- 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
3 practice notes
-
R. v. T.S.P., 2019 ONSC 5025
...to present a misleading impression. R. v. Hamilton, 2011 ONCA 399 (CanLII), at para. 180; See also R. v. Sipes, 2012 BCSC 351 3) Section 276 Application [42] The accused seeks......
-
Earl v. Cindrich, 2020 BCSC 197
...the plaintiff. Counsel for the plaintiff, on the other hand, cited the case of Gignac v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 2012 BCSC 351, where the court held that costs of future medical care must be: (1) medically justified; and (2) reasonable. On the basis of that authority and ......
-
R. v. Sipes (D.G.) et al., 2012 BCSC 852
...(i) lines 151-157; and (ii) lines 319-328. [4] On March 9, 2012, I ruled that Sipes had put his character in issue: see R. v. Sipes , 2012 BCSC 351 (the "character in issue decision"). I said at paras. 42-43: ... I find that Sipes and O'Donnell led evidence of the witness&apo......
3 cases
-
R. v. T.S.P., 2019 ONSC 5025
...to present a misleading impression. R. v. Hamilton, 2011 ONCA 399 (CanLII), at para. 180; See also R. v. Sipes, 2012 BCSC 351 3) Section 276 Application [42] The accused seeks......
-
Earl v. Cindrich, 2020 BCSC 197
...the plaintiff. Counsel for the plaintiff, on the other hand, cited the case of Gignac v. Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, 2012 BCSC 351, where the court held that costs of future medical care must be: (1) medically justified; and (2) reasonable. On the basis of that authority and ......
-
R. v. Sipes (D.G.) et al., 2012 BCSC 852
...(i) lines 151-157; and (ii) lines 319-328. [4] On March 9, 2012, I ruled that Sipes had put his character in issue: see R. v. Sipes , 2012 BCSC 351 (the "character in issue decision"). I said at paras. 42-43: ... I find that Sipes and O'Donnell led evidence of the witness&apo......