Canada Case Law

Sookram (Re)

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Board's disposition was unreasonable because it failed to transparently consider and balance the statutory factors in s.672.54, neglected the appellant's reintegration and mental condition, and did not adequately justify refusal to include a community living term that would allow placement on housing waitlists; the appeal is allowed and the disposition is amended to include a community living term with safeguards (approval by the person in charge at St. Joseph's and Board notice before community discharge).

Source excerpt

• Not criminally responsible (ncr)
• Community living
• Disposition orders
• Standard of review
• Reintegration
• Least onerous and least restrictive

Read case analysis

R. v. Darrigan

Court

Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada

The CMAC upheld a sentence appeal in a military theft case, finding no requirement for imprisonment absent exceptional circumstances and no demonstrable unfitness.

• Theft
• Breach of trust
• Sentencing principles
• Proportionality
• Parity
• Deterrence

Read case analysis

R. v. Solano

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal is dismissed because the sentencing judge had ample evidence to conclude the appellant met the statutory criteria for dangerous offender designation and that his risk of violent recidivism could not reasonably be controlled in the community; the judge did not err in declining to classify the appellant as a long-term offender where treatment prospects were speculative, contested, or unproven and where psychiatric evidence did not establish a reasonable possibility of eventual control.

Source excerpt

• Dangerous offender designation
• Long-term offender / long-term supervision
• Indeterminate sentence
• Risk assessment
• Psychiatric evidence
• Reintegration

Read case analysis

Children’s Aid Society of Toronto v. M.S.

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The appeal is dismissed because the trial judge made a careful, individualized best‑interests assessment of each child, her factual findings were supported by the evidence, and there was no error in declining to alter the placement decisions or extend society wardship; fresh evidence did not affect the outcome.

Source excerpt

• Wardship
• Reintegration
• Best interests
• Extension of society wardship
• Publication restrictions

Read case analysis

Listes v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a parole decision, holding the Board reasonably applied the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and considered relevant evidence.

• Parole denial
• Judicial review standard
• Risk assessment
• Reintegration
• Least restrictive alternative
• Corrections and conditional release act ss.100-102

Read case analysis