Search for: "LaMere v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 58
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jun 2017, 4:00 am
While Lamer CJ may have been pointing out the obvious more than a hundred years after the fact, his observation goes beyond the rise of the administrative state. [read post]
12 May 2017, 4:00 am
As stated by former Chief Justice Antonio Lamer in 1995: Does our thoroughness, at times, place substantial justice out of reach? [read post]
21 Mar 2017, 3:20 am
The court in Wesley dba MTLFREETV.com v Bell Canada et al 2017 FCA 55 easily rejected this attempt to re-argue the evidence stating: The appellants do not challenge the Federal Court’s finding with respect to the first prong of the test. [read post]
28 Jan 2016, 4:00 am
But with one exception, the case law on the admissibility of electronic records and electronic discovery ignores them; see: R. v. [read post]
16 Oct 2015, 4:09 pm
This is a principle that has been stated and re-stated by the Supreme Court of Canada. [read post]
7 Oct 2015, 3:28 am
Of particular note, he stated Torrential Downpour's direct connection capabilities were no different from other commercially available versions of BitTorrent and it (Torrential Downpour) had no rate of error.U.S. v. [read post]
23 Sep 2015, 4:00 am
The principle was described as follows by Lamer CJ in R v Jones, 1994 CanLII 85 (SCC), [1994] 2 SCR 229 at p 249: Any state action that coerces an individual to furnish evidence against him or herself in a proceeding in which the individual and the state are adversaries violates the principle against self-incrimination. [read post]
23 Aug 2015, 3:49 pm
Dille v. [read post]
5 Mar 2015, 6:00 am
Entrapment has similarly failed as a defence in terrorism prosecutions in the United States. [read post]
28 Dec 2014, 7:53 am
” Such a principle “states in general terms a requirement of justice from which more specific legal doctrines may be derived. [read post]
23 Oct 2014, 6:00 am
Chief Justice Lamer has stated extra-judicially that “[t]he Charter can be understood to give effect to Canada’s international legal obligations, and should therefore be interpreted in a way that conforms to those obligations. [read post]
2 Oct 2014, 9:16 pm
[Emphasis added.]As stated more recently in Hryniak v. [read post]
9 Jul 2014, 11:39 am
She tends to sit nine much more [than previous Chief Justice Antonio Lamer], so there’s a more full bench. [read post]
16 Jan 2014, 4:30 am
Evidence Act) were legislated into hurried existence in the late 1960’s, in response to the decision in, Myers v. [read post]
30 Dec 2013, 5:25 am
Ge v. [read post]
22 Dec 2013, 5:26 pm
In Schachter v Canada, the seminal case on constitutional remedies, Lamer CJC, as he then was, cautions that the question of whether to suspend a declaration of invalidity “should turn not on considerations of the role of the courts and the legislature but rather on considerations relating to the effect of an immediate declaration on the public. [read post]
2 Oct 2013, 8:48 am
In the recent case of United States v. [read post]
24 Jun 2013, 9:00 am
In the case of R. v. [read post]
13 Jun 2013, 1:26 pm
A unanimous 7-member panel (Lamer C.J. and La Forest, Sopinka, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci and Major JJ.) in reasons written by Major J., stated at para. 15. [15] The “but for” test is unworkable in some circumstances, so the courts have recognized that causation is established where the defendant’s negligence “materially contributed” to the occurrence of the injury: Myers v. [read post]
