R. v. C.B.M.

R. v. C.B.M.

The application was granted because the contested evidence is relevant to credibility and recent fabrication, relates to specific prior reports, is not being tendered for impermissible inferences about consent or sexual propensity, and its probative value — limited to the general nature and reporting of prior...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2023 NSSC 88
Parties
Crown: His Majesty the King; Accused: C.B.M.; Complainant: Complainant
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Offences / Section 278 Stage 2 Admissibility Hearing (second Stage)
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Section 276, Section 278, Admissibility of Sexual Activity Evidence, Recent Fabrication, Credibility, Publication Ban
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Evidence Sexual Offences Law Procedural Law Section 276 Section 278 Admissibility of Sexual Activity Evidence Recent Fabrication +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

His Majesty the King

Crown

C.B.M.

Accused

Complainant

Complainant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Offences / Section 278 Stage 2 Admissibility Hearing (second Stage)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of prior reports by the complainant involving sexual allegations is admissible under s.276/278
  2. 2 Whether the probative value of such evidence on credibility/recent fabrication is significant and not substantially outweighed by prejudice
  3. 3 Whether the defence may ask about nondisclosure without eliciting sexual details

Ratio Decidendi

The application was granted because the contested evidence is relevant to credibility and recent fabrication, relates to specific prior reports, is not being tendered for impermissible inferences about consent or sexual propensity, and its probative value — limited to the general nature and reporting of prior complaints and opportunities to disclose — is significant and not substantially outweighed by the prejudice to the administration of justice or the complainant's privacy when properly limited.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Application under s.278.93 granted
  • Defence may question the complainant about the existence and reporting of two prior matters and why she did not disclose allegations about the accused at those times