R v V(C)

R v V(C)

The s.276 application was dismissed because the proposed cross-examination concerning prior sexual activity and communications would primarily support prohibited twin myths and is not relevant to an issue at trial; the defence failed to establish an air of reality for the proposed defence (honest but mistaken belief) and offered no admissible probative basis that outweighs the prejudice to the administration of justice.

Citation
2020 NSPC 44
Parties
Crown/prosecutor: R; Accused/defendant: V(C); Complainant: Complainant
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Assault (s.266 Criminal Code) / Stage Two S.276 Voir Dire Application; Decision on Admissibility of Prior Sexual Activity Evidence
Outcome
Section 276 application dismissed; leave to cross-examine about prior sexual activity denied
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Consent, Section 276 Criminal Code, Admissibility of Prior Sexual Activity, Honest But Mistaken Belief in Communicated Consent, Twin Myths Prohibition, Publication Restrictions
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Sexual Assault Consent Section 276 Criminal Code Admissibility of Prior Sexual Activity Honest But Mistaken Belief in Communicated Consent Twin Myths Prohibition +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Crown/prosecutor

V(C)

Accused/defendant

Complainant

Complainant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Assault (s.266 Criminal Code) / Stage Two S.276 Voir Dire Application; Decision on Admissibility of Prior Sexual Activity Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.276 permits cross-examination about prior sexual activity between complainant and accused
  2. 2 Whether proposed evidence is admissible to support honest but mistaken belief in communicated consent
  3. 3 Whether proposed questioning impermissibly advances twin myths (that prior consent implies consent or diminishes credibility)

Ratio Decidendi

The s.276 application was dismissed because the proposed cross-examination concerning prior sexual activity and communications would primarily support prohibited twin myths and is not relevant to an issue at trial; the defence failed to establish an air of reality for the proposed defence (honest but mistaken belief) and offered no admissible probative basis that outweighs the prejudice to the administration of justice.

Court Disposition

Section 276 application dismissed; leave to cross-examine about prior sexual activity denied

Orders

  • Section 276 application dismissed
  • No leave to cross-examine the complainant about other sexual activity or related communications beyond evidence already adduced