Canada Case Law

R. v. Al-Akhali

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The conviction is upheld because the appellant did not take the reasonable steps required to establish an honest but mistaken belief in communicated consent—non‑verbal conduct between strangers was insufficient and he did not ask for consent—and the trial judge properly disbelieved the appellant and accepted the complainant's evidence. The sentence is varied because the trial judge erred in principle by insufficiently weighing the mitigating effect of youth, rehabilitation and restraint for a youthful first‑time offender; a three‑year custodial sentence is substituted as the proportionate, in…

Source excerpt

• Mistaken belief in consent
• Consent
• Reasonable steps to ascertain consent
• Credibility assessment
• Youthful offender sentencing
• Rehabilitation

Read case analysis

Grain Workers' Union Local 333 v. Viterra Inc.

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court held that time card reports, exception reports, and diary entries were admissible in a contempt proceeding, including as real evidence and business records.

• Hearsay
• Business records
• Past recollection recorded
• Machine-generated evidence
• Admissibility
• Canada evidence act s.30

Read case analysis

C.L.H. v. K.A.G.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court admitted a psychiatrist’s certified clinical notes as business records under s. 42 of the Evidence Act and allowed related testimony, including a possible admission against interest.

• Admissibility of business records
• Admissions against interest
• Hospital records
• Hearsay exceptions
• Past recollection recorded
• Witness testimony procedure

Read case analysis

R. v. Samaniego

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The majority held that the trial judge’s interventions and rulings were proper exercises of trial management discretion entitled to deference, did not exclude material evidence necessary for the defence, and did not render the trial unfair; accordingly the conviction and sentence were affirmed.

Source excerpt

• Possession of firearm (s.95(1) criminal code)
• Cross-examination
• Prior inconsistent statements
• Past recollection recorded
• Admissibility of evidence
• Joint trial and rights of co-accused

Read case analysis

R. v. Howe

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The court admitted R.M.'s audiotaped police statement and transcript for the truth of their contents because, on the balance of probabilities, the statement exhibited sufficient indicia of reliability (contemporaneous audiotape, detailed internal consistency, corroboration, demeanour on tape, and opportunity for cross‑examination) and was reasonably necessary given that R.M.’s in‑court testimony had materially neutered key inculpatory details—largely for reasons of fear—such that exclusion would leave a distorted record; admission did not materially prejudice the defendants' fair trial rights.

Source excerpt

• Hearsay
• Principled hearsay exception
• Necessity and reliability
• Past recollection recorded
• Witness recantation
• Fair trial rights

Read case analysis

R. v. Christhurajah

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held that Sean Murphy’s handwritten notes on photocopied photographs were admissible as past recollection recorded under the Wigmore criteria.

• Past recollection recorded
• Admissibility of documentary notes
• Wigmore criteria
• Photographic identification
• Hearsay exception
• Past-recollection-recorded

Read case analysis

R. v. Christhurjah

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court allowed evidence of prior photographic identifications and dismissed defence objections, ordering the witness to be recalled if needed for further cross-examination.

• Identification evidence
• Prior identification exception to hearsay
• Past recollection recorded
• Destruction of notes/preservation duties
• Prejudice and admissibility
• Disclosure and trial fairness

Read case analysis

R. v. Howe

Court

Supreme Court of Nova Scotia

The judge exercised discretion and ordered that if the defence intends to put any portion of the December 5, 2013 statement to the witness during cross-examination the defence must disclose the entire statement to the Crown to ensure fundamental fairness and allow effective Crown redirect; litigation privilege does not prevent disclosure where reliance in court results in waiver.

Source excerpt

• Disclosure
• Prior inconsistent statements
• Litigation privilege
• Section 10 canada evidence act
• Past recollection recorded
• Khelawon application

Read case analysis

R. v. Louangrath

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The past recollection recorded statement met the Richardson conditions and did not present rare-case reliability concerns warranting exclusion; the narrative portions posed no prejudicial misuse; the jury was properly instructed and identity of the caller was established; and the global three-and-a-half year sentence was within the sentencing judge's discretion and not manifestly unfit.

Source excerpt

• Hearsay
• Past recollection recorded
• Principled approach to hearsay
• Admissibility
• Evans procedure (identity of declarant)
• Jury directions

Read case analysis

White v. Bysterveld

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court held that the plaintiff’s pain journal met the test for past recollection recorded, but excluded it because late disclosure would unfairly prejudice the defendant.

• Past recollection recorded
• Disclosure and production
• Prejudice vs probative value
• Exclusion of evidence
• Expert evidence
• Past-recollection-recorded

Read case analysis