In R v McKee [41110], the Supreme Court (SCC) will decide whether a document in the possession of the Crown – containing information of police misconduct – obtained in respect of a unrelated investigation constitutes first-party disclosure automatically provided to the accused. This decision will likely turn on whether the Supreme Court adopts a narrow or broad […]
R v. Hanrahan, 2025 SCC 1 is a short oral decision — a mere paragraph dismissing the Crown’s appeal against a sexual assault acquittal. The Supreme Court affirmed the Newfoundland Court of Appeal’s decision (R. v. Hanrahan, 2024 NLCA 9, “NLCA Decision”) and in doing so they affirmed deference to the trial judge’s factual findings […]
In many jurisdictions, the state has no right of appeal against the acquittal of an accused at trial. This is not so in Canada, where the Attorney General may appeal an acquittal on questions of law. In R. v. T.J.F, 2024 SCC 38 [“T.J.F.”], the Supreme Court of Canada allowed a Crown appeal of an […]
What standard of review applies when reviewing the vires of subordinate legislation? In the post-Vavilov era, this question has been the subject of conflicting appellate guidance. The Alberta Court of Appeal in this case followed the “hyper-deferential” standard that the Supreme Court (“SCC”) set in Katz Group Canada Inc. v. Ontario (Health and Long‑Term Care) […]
In R v Carignan [41186], the Supreme Court of Canada (“Supreme Court”) will — for the first time — interpret the scope of and relationship between ss 495(2) and 495(3) of the Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46. Section 495 governs police powers to arrest without warrant. Subsections (2) and (3) of this provision have […]
In Canada (Attorney General) v Power 2024 SCC 26 [Power], the Supreme Court held that the Crown can be held liable in damages for passing legislation later deemed unconstitutional. This case turns on conflicting constitutional principles. On the one hand, the principles of parliamentary sovereignty, the separation of powers, and parliamentary privilege call for absolute […]
The Supreme Court has recognized that habeas corpus is “the strongest tool a prisoner has to ensure that the deprivation of his or her liberty is not unlawful” (Mission Institution v Khela, 2014 SCC 24 at para 29 [Khela]). In Dorsey v Canada (Attorney General), the Court will decide [41132] whether that tool is available […]