Search for: "State v. Crown" Results 161 - 180 of 1,942
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Jan 2023, 11:38 am by Michael Oykhman
Lawful excuse As explicitly stated in section 127 itself, there is no offence where the accused has a lawful excuse to disobey the court order. [read post]
3 Jan 2023, 6:30 am by Guest Blogger
In 1775 Americans were denied “consent” and had no representation in Parliament, which in conjunction with the Crown, persistently denied Americans a right to self-government. [read post]
2 Jan 2023, 3:03 pm by Lawrence B. Ebert
Region, 558 U.S. 67, 81 (2009) (quoting United States v. [read post]
1 Jan 2023, 4:00 am by Administrator
Finding that there was strong circumstantial evidence relating to possession, the judge was faced with a lack of evidence that could counter the inference of guilt reasonably arising from the Crown’s evidence. [read post]
30 Dec 2022, 10:32 am by Michael Oykhman
To convict someone of murder or manslaughter the Crown must always prove the requisite actus reus and mens rea elements of the offence. [read post]
30 Dec 2022, 9:55 am by Michael Oykhman
To prove the crime of hostage taking, the Crown must show that the accused intended to ‘force the hand’ of or compel a person, group, state, international organization or intergovernmental organization other than the hostage to commit an act or omit to do something (usually this is to the hostage taker’s benefit but it doesn’t need to be). [read post]
30 Dec 2022, 9:29 am by Michael Oykhman
The overall objectives of Bill C-36 are stated as follows: To protect those who sell their own sexual services (sex workers); To protect communities, and especially children, from the harms caused by prostitution; and To reduce the demand for prostitution and its incidence. [read post]
29 Dec 2022, 1:07 am by Frank Cranmer
The Court has recently returned to the matter in two judgments: Alm v Austria [2022] ECHR Application no. 20921/21 and Sager and Others v Austria [2022] ECHR Application no. 61827/19. [read post]
23 Dec 2022, 12:14 am by Frank Cranmer
” It appears that the Crown Prosecution Service commented that the Bible contains references “which are simply no longer appropriate in modern society and which would be deemed offensive if stated in public”. [read post]
15 Dec 2022, 3:00 am by Written on behalf of Peter McSherry
The Bill limited annual pay increases to 1% for Ontario government employees, crown corporations and certain private corporations. [read post]
15 Dec 2022, 3:00 am by Written on behalf of Peter McSherry
The Bill limited annual pay increases to 1% for Ontario government employees, crown corporations and certain private corporations. [read post]
14 Dec 2022, 5:30 am by Elin Hofverberg
In 2016, the Danish queen announced that only Prince Christian (the eldest child of the Crown Prince Frederik) will receive an annuity from the Danish state as an adult. [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 8:56 am by Michael Oykhman
  It is no longer the law that the Crown simply proves that the offender possessed or uttered the counterfeit money: R v Freng, 1993 CanLII 913 (BCCA). [read post]
7 Dec 2022, 8:37 am by Michael Oykhman
This conduct can include publicly disobeying a court order (United Nurses of Alberta v Alberta (Attorney General), 1992 CanLII 99 (SCC)) R v Devost, 2010 ONCA 459 (CanLII) also stated that the identity of the accused as well as the date and time of their prohibited conduct must be confirmed (at para 34). [read post]
5 Dec 2022, 3:00 am by Jeff Welty
The majority expressed some doubt about whether that tire chalking is actually a search under the physical trespass theory of United States v. [read post]
2 Dec 2022, 1:57 pm by Michael Oykhman
 In a case called United States of America v Dynar, 1997 CanLII 359 (SCC), [1997] 2 SCR 462 (a Canadian case) it was noted that “a person may be convicted of attempt, even when completion of the criminal act was impossible at the time”. [read post]
23 Nov 2022, 10:51 am by William Appleton
Department of State’s Nov. 17 filing in Cengiz et al v. bin Salman et al stating that the department recognizes Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s sovereign immunity as a sitting head of state. [read post]