Kienapple (Cases): Difference between revisions

From Criminal Law Notebook
m Text replacement - "<!--***-->" to "<!--****-->"
 
m Text replacement - "perONCA|Doherty" to "perONCA-H|Doherty"
 
(12 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<!--****-->
{{LevelZero}}
{{LevelZero}}
{{HeaderProcCases}}
{{HeaderProcCases}}
Line 9: Line 8:
! Case Name !!  Summary
! Case Name !!  Summary
|-
|-
| R v Hope,<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/fnjm2 2011 NLTD 143] (CanLII) ||sexual assault and sexual interference
| {{CanLIIR-S|Hope|fnjm2|2011 NLTD 143 (CanLII)}}{{perNLSC|Stack J}} ||sexual assault and sexual interference
|-
|-
| R v Ramage,<br> [http://canlii.ca/t/2bkq5 2010 ONCA 488] (CanLII)|| Impaired & Dangerous driving valid
| {{CanLIIR-S|Ramage|2bkq5|2010 ONCA 488 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA-H|Doherty JA}} || Impaired & Dangerous driving valid
|-
|-
| John v The Queen,<br> [1985] 2 SCR 476, [http://canlii.ca/t/1ftxp 1985 CanLII 15] (SCC)||  
| {{CanLIIRPC-S|John v The Queen|1ftxp|1985 CanLII 15 (SCC)|[1985] 2 SCR 476}}{{perSCC|Estey and Lamer JJ}}||  
|-
|-
| R v Davis,<br>[1999] 3 SCR 759, [http://canlii.ca/t/1fql7 1999 CanLII 638] (SCC)||
|{{CanLIIRP-S|Davis|1fql7|1999 CanLII 638 (SCC)|[1999] 3 SCR 759}}{{perSCC|Lamer CJ}}||
|-
|-
| R v Prince,<br> [1986] 2 SCR 480, [http://canlii.ca/t/1ftr3 1986 CanLII 40] (SCC)||
|{{CanLIIRP-S|Prince|1ftr3|1986 CanLII 40 (SCC)|[1986] 2 SCR 480}}{{perSCC|Dickson CJ}}||
|-
|-
| R v Pringle,<br> [1989] 1 SCR 1645, [http://canlii.ca/t/1ft4b 1989 CanLII 65] (SCC)||
|{{CanLIIRP-S|Pringle|1ft4b|1989 CanLII 65 (SCC)|[1989] 1 SCR 1645}}{{perSCC|Lamer J}}||
|-
|-
| R v Wigman,<br> [1987] 1 SCR 246, [http://canlii.ca/t/1ftnb 1985 CanLII 1] (SCC)||
|{{CanLIIRP-S|Wigman|1ftnb|1985 CanLII 1 (SCC)|[1987] 1 SCR 246}}{{TheCourtSCC}}||
|}
|}

Latest revision as of 20:40, 9 May 2024

Kienapple

See also: Kienapple Principle
Case Name Summary
R v Hope, 2011 NLTD 143 (CanLII), per Stack J sexual assault and sexual interference
R v Ramage, 2010 ONCA 488 (CanLII), per Doherty JA Impaired & Dangerous driving valid
John v The Queen,
1985 CanLII 15 (SCC), [1985] 2 SCR 476, per Estey and Lamer JJ
R v Davis,
1999 CanLII 638 (SCC), [1999] 3 SCR 759, per Lamer CJ
R v Prince,
1986 CanLII 40 (SCC), [1986] 2 SCR 480, per Dickson CJ
R v Pringle,
1989 CanLII 65 (SCC), [1989] 1 SCR 1645, per Lamer J
R v Wigman,
1985 CanLII 1 (SCC), [1987] 1 SCR 246, per curiam