Search for: "Person v. R " Results 1 - 20 of 42,797
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
7 Jun 2024, 5:11 am by Michael Oykhman
For example, the court in a case known as R v Patrick, 2007 CanLII 7579 (ONSC), noted that “carrying does not require personal possession”. [read post]
7 Jun 2024, 4:20 am by Jonathan Santman (Brinkhof)
It may at best be indicative of how a person skilled in the art would understand the relevant feature. [read post]
6 Jun 2024, 7:21 am by Michael Oykhman
Regarding a reasonable expectation of privacy, a recent decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in R v Jarvis, 2019 SCC 10 noted that people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in an area, location or circumstance if the person does not expect to be secretly recorded or observed. [read post]
6 Jun 2024, 5:50 am by Michael Oykhman
If a reasonable person looking at the material would determine that it creates an objectively ascertainable risk of phy [read post]
6 Jun 2024, 5:27 am by Michael Oykhman
This was discussed in the case of R v McSween (2020), ONCA 343 (CanLII). [read post]
4 Jun 2024, 3:47 am by Michael Oykhman
The case of R v ML, 2021 NBCA 27 also stated that the actus reus is made out where a “reasonable person aware of the circumstances would perceive the words as a threat of death or bodily harm”. [read post]
31 May 2024, 7:00 am by Rogier Bartels
In R v Gul, it noted “that insurgents in non-international armed conflicts do not enjoy combatant immunity” (para. 50). [read post]
28 May 2024, 11:42 am by Giles Peaker
Mr C’s position was that of a person in ‘accommodation plus’ need, as per R (Aburas) v London Borough of Southwark (2019) EWHC 2754 (Admin). [read post]
28 May 2024, 11:38 am by INFORRM
On 21 May 2024, judgment was handed down in R (On the application of National Council for Civil Liberties) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] EWHC 1181 (Admin). [read post]