Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, finding error in admitting a child’s hearsay statement under the principled exception and ordering a new trial on Count 2.
Ontario Court of Appeal ordered a new trial in a sexual-assault appeal, finding hearsay was admitted without properly hearing the complainant on the voir dire.
The trial judge erred in admitting the deceased witness’s 2017 police statement for its truth because the Crown failed to establish threshold reliability under Bradshaw: the judge misidentified and misapplied corroborative material, overlooked case-specific hearsay dangers and alternative explanations, and admitted an incriminating "caught a body" utterance without adequate corroboration; additionally the jury warning on discreditable conduct was inadequate; convictions set aside and new trial ordered for both appellants (sentence issues rendered moot).
Source excerpt
The court excluded Wayne Parry’s audio-recorded hearsay statement, finding necessity but no threshold reliability and, alternatively, that prejudice outweighed probative value.
The child’s out‑of‑court statement was excluded because it lacked threshold reliability — it did not possess the necessary circumstantial guarantee of trustworthiness due to multiple significant defects in the interview and surrounding circumstances (perception problems, internal inconsistencies, leading questioning, recording/equipment failures, misleading statements to the child about disclosure, inducement/expectation of reward, lack of corroboration and timing after planned transition home) and the Minister refused to accept any conditional mode of receiving the evidence that would allow…
Source excerpt
The court admitted the deceased complainant’s three out-of-court statements under the principled hearsay exception, finding threshold reliability through corroborative DNA and demeanour evidence.
The court refused to admit a deceased witness’s warned statement, finding no threshold reliability under Bradshaw and rejecting its use as exculpatory evidence for Heikel.
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that an accomplice’s out-of-court statement was improperly admitted under the hearsay principled exception and ordered a new trial.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal because the trial judge gave adequate jury instructions to require separate verdicts and to prohibit propensity reasoning, correctly admitted the Hockett videotaped statements based on procedural threshold reliability (procedural reliability alone was sufficient), properly instructed the jury on how to assess those statements so no additional corroboration warning was required, and properly exercised discretion in refusing an adjournment after counsel was discharged.
Source excerpt
The court partly allowed an application to adduce evidence in an extradition hearing, admitting only limited portions of Mr. Sibaja’s statement if authenticated, and refusing Mr. Rodriguez’s report.
Explore more
