Necessity (Cases)

From Canadian Criminal Law Notebook
Jump to: navigation, search


Case Name Summary
R v DeFrias,
2016 ONCJ 313 (CanLII)
The accused was convicted of impaired driving. She unsuccessfully argued necessity on account that she was suicidal and was intending to go to the hospital.
R v Dirk,
2012 SKPC 61 (CanLII)
impaired driving -- accused drove a few feet in order to avoid person who was smashing his car-not proportionate, or without alternatives
R v Valauskas,
2012 ONCJ 790 (CanLII)
impaired driving - the accused drove drunk to escape attackers. Found not guilty.
R v Costoff,
2010 ONCJ 109 (CanLII)
impaired - accused's passenger driving to hospital
R v Murray,
2010 ABQB 784 (CanLII)
impaired driving charge -- accused co-worked beaten unconscious and a group of angry men threatened to beat him--defence accepted
R v Desrosiers,
2007 ONCJ 225 (CanLII)
impaired - suicidal man driving to hospital. Found not guilty.
R v Maragh,
[2003] O.J. No. 3574(*no link)
flight from police
R v McCain,
[2003] O.J. No. 1762 (C.J.)(*no link)
Breach of recognizance
R v Burgess,
[2003] O.J. No. 4633 (C.J.)(*no link)
failing to remain at the scene
R v Sanders,
2001 CanLII 28329 (ON SC), [2001] O.J. No. 2207
cultivation --
R v Hill
[1999] BCJ No. 933 (Prov.Ct.)(*no link)
failing to remain at the scene
R v Gourlay
(1996), 182 A.R. 126 (ABPC)(*no link)
R v Lalonde
(1995), 1995 CanLII 7155 (ON SC), 22 O.R. (3d) 275 (Gen.Div.)
fraud -
R v West
(1994), 1994 CanLII 4535 (NL SCTD), 123 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 234, (NLSC)
impaired driving - successful. accused was driving to corner store to call police to eject a guest
R v Berriman,
1987 CanLII 3967 (NL CA)
impaired - accused believed an attacker was following, but not in immediate danger and had other options.
R v Stevenson,
[1986] 42 Man.R.(2d) 133 (MBQB)(*no link)
R v Fry
(1977), 36 CCC (2d) 396 (SKPC)(*no link)
dangerous operation - successful