R. v. A.U., [2006] Nunavut Cases 10 (CJ)
| Judge | Kilpatrick, J. |
| Court | Nunavut Court of Justice (Canada) |
| Case Date | May 23, 2006 |
| Jurisdiction | Nunavut |
| Citations | [2006] Nunavut Cases 10 (CJ);2006 NUCJ 10 |
R. v. A.U., [2006] Nunavut Cases 10 (CJ)
MLB headnote and full text
Temp. Cite: [2006] Nunavut Cases TBEd. JN.117
Her Majesty the Queen (prosecutor) v. A.U. (accused)
(07-05-29; 2006 NUCJ 10)
Indexed As: R. v. A.U.
Nunavut Court of Justice
Iqaluit
Kilpatrick, J.
June 6, 2006.
Summary:
This headnote contains no summary.
Editor's Note: Certain names in the following case have been initialized or the case otherwise edited to prevent the disclosure of identities where required by law, publication ban, Maritime Law Book's editorial policy or otherwise.
Criminal Law - Topic 3577
Preliminary inquiry - Evidence - Unsworn evidence of child - See paragraphs 1 to 42.
Criminal Law - Topic 3596
Preliminary inquiry - Evidence - Evidence not otherwise admissible that judge considers credible or trustworthy - See paragraphs 1 to 42.
Counsel:
Christine Gagnon, for the prosecutor;
Sue Cooper, for the accused.
This case was heard on May 23, 2006, by Kilpatrick, J., of the Nunavut Court of Justice, who released the following judgment on June 6, 2006.
Please note: The following judgment has not been edited.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R. v. C.H.,
...If a properly instructed trier of fact acting judicially might reasonably determine it is reliable, it is trustworthy. (See R. v. Uttak, 2006 NUCJ 10) [8] Sections 540(7) and 540(9) interconnect such that the application to cross-examine the complainant relates to th......
-
R v McKnight, 2017 ABPC 250
...not address the issue, rather dealt with the test to determine if a statement is trustworthy/credible (R v PLR, 2015 ABPC 168, R v Uttak, 2006 NUCJ 10, R v Pinnock, 2004 ONCJ 193 and R v Jesssamine, 2013 MBPC 2).[12] Section 540(9) allows the court to order upon application, cross examinati......
-
R. v. Noah (W.), 2010 NUCJ 22
...the evidence heard at the preliminary inquiry may be very different from that received in a trial environment. In the case of R. v. Uttak, 2006 NUCJ 10 CanLII, 69 W.C.B. (2d) 773, at paragraph 3 through 5, the Court had occasion to review the impact of these statutory amendments on the trad......
-
R. v. Moyer, 2020 MBPC 5
...a properly instructed trier of fact acting judicially might reasonably determine it is reliable then it is trustworthy. (See R. v. Uttak, 2006 NUCJ 10 which has been adopted by several of my colleagues in the Provincial Court in reported and unreported [9] Finally, b......
-
R. v. C.H.,
...If a properly instructed trier of fact acting judicially might reasonably determine it is reliable, it is trustworthy. (See R. v. Uttak, 2006 NUCJ 10) [8] Sections 540(7) and 540(9) interconnect such that the application to cross-examine the complainant relates to th......
-
R v McKnight, 2017 ABPC 250
...not address the issue, rather dealt with the test to determine if a statement is trustworthy/credible (R v PLR, 2015 ABPC 168, R v Uttak, 2006 NUCJ 10, R v Pinnock, 2004 ONCJ 193 and R v Jesssamine, 2013 MBPC 2).[12] Section 540(9) allows the court to order upon application, cross examinati......
-
R. v. Noah (W.), 2010 NUCJ 22
...the evidence heard at the preliminary inquiry may be very different from that received in a trial environment. In the case of R. v. Uttak, 2006 NUCJ 10 CanLII, 69 W.C.B. (2d) 773, at paragraph 3 through 5, the Court had occasion to review the impact of these statutory amendments on the trad......
-
R. v. Moyer, 2020 MBPC 5
...a properly instructed trier of fact acting judicially might reasonably determine it is reliable then it is trustworthy. (See R. v. Uttak, 2006 NUCJ 10 which has been adopted by several of my colleagues in the Provincial Court in reported and unreported [9] Finally, b......