Spousal Immunity: Difference between revisions
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
; Accused and spouse | ; Accused and spouse | ||
4 (1) Every person charged with an offence, and, except as otherwise provided in this section, the wife or husband, as the case may be, of the person so charged, is a competent witness for the defence, whether the person so charged is charged solely or jointly with any other person. | 4 (1) Every person charged with an offence, and, except as otherwise provided in this section, the wife or husband, as the case may be, of the person so charged, is a competent witness for the defence, whether the person so charged is charged solely or jointly with any other person. | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
{{Removed|(2), (3), (4), (5) and (6)}} | |||
R.S., 1985, c. C-5, s. 4; | R.S., 1985, c. C-5, s. 4; | ||
R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.)}}, s. 17; | R.S., {{LegHistory80s|1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.)}}, s. 17; | ||
| Line 48: | Line 49: | ||
{{quotation1| | {{quotation1| | ||
4...<br> | 4...<br> | ||
{{Removed|(1), (2), (3), (4) and (5)}} | |||
; Failure to testify | ; Failure to testify | ||
(6) The failure of the person charged, or of the wife or husband of that person, to testify shall not be made the subject of comment by the judge or by counsel for the prosecution. | (6) The failure of the person charged, or of the wife or husband of that person, to testify shall not be made the subject of comment by the judge or by counsel for the prosecution. | ||
Revision as of 13:46, 5 March 2020
General Principles
Spousal Competence
- Common law rule of spousal competence
At common law a spouse of an accused is incompetent to testify except where the charge involves the person, liberty, or health, of the spouse.[1]
- Evidence Act rule of spousal competence
Section 4(2) of the Canada Evidence Act modifies the common law by stating that:
4
[omitted (1)]
- Spouse of accused
(2) No person is incompetent, or uncompellable, to testify for the prosecution by reason only that they are married to the accused.
[omitted (3)]
(4) and (5) [Repealed, 2015, c. 13, s. 52]
...
[omitted (6)]
R.S., 1985, c. C-5, s. 4; R.S., 1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.), s. 17; 2002, c. 1, s. 166; 2014, c. 25, s. 34, c. 31, s. 27; 2015, c. 13, s. 52.– CEA
- Competence for Defence
- Accused and spouse
4 (1) Every person charged with an offence, and, except as otherwise provided in this section, the wife or husband, as the case may be, of the person so charged, is a competent witness for the defence, whether the person so charged is charged solely or jointly with any other person.
[omitted (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6)]
R.S., 1985, c. C-5, s. 4; R.S., 1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.), s. 17; 2002, c. 1, s. 166; 2014, c. 25, s. 34, c. 31, s. 27; 2015, c. 13, s. 52.– CEA
- No Negative Inferences
4...
[omitted (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5)]
- Failure to testify
(6) The failure of the person charged, or of the wife or husband of that person, to testify shall not be made the subject of comment by the judge or by counsel for the prosecution. R.S., 1985, c. C-5, s. 4; R.S., 1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.), s. 17; 2002, c. 1, s. 166; 2014, c. 25, s. 34, c. 31, s. 27; 2015, c. 13, s. 52.
– CEA
There must be something more than an "off-hand reference" to the fact that the accused chose not to testify to engage the prohibition under s. 4(6).[2]
- ↑ R v Hawkins, 1996 CanLII 154 (SCC), [1996] 3 SCR 1043, per Lamer CJ and Iacobucci J
- ↑ R v Potvin, 1989 CanLII 130 (SCC), , [1989] 1 SCR 525, per Wilson J
Spousal Privilege
Spousal privilege is a class protection of certain communications between husband and wife. It is a protection that is separate and apart from spousal competency.[1]
A spouse who is found to be competent and compellable may still invoke privilege to protect their communications.[2]
This class of privilege does not exist at common law, but rather was created by way of s. 4(3) of the Evidence Act, which states:
4...
[omitted (1) and (2)]
(3) No husband is compellable to disclose any communication made to him by his wife during their marriage, and no wife is compellable to disclose any communication made to her by her husband during their marriage.[omitted (4), (5) and (6)]
R.S., 1985, c. C-5, s. 4; R.S., 1985, c. 19 (3rd Supp.), s. 17; 2002, c. 1, s. 166; 2014, c. 25, s. 34, c. 31, s. 27; 2015, c. 13, s. 52.
– CEA
Third parties may "testify to communications between husband and wife that were overheard, intercepted, or otherwise discovered".[3]
- ↑ See McWilliams' Canadian Criminal Evidence, 4th ed., vol. 1, looseleaf (Aurora, ON: Canada Law Book, 2010) at para 13:40.10
- ↑ R v Zylstra, 1995 CanLII 893 (ON CA), per curiam
- ↑ R v RRW (No. 2), 2010 NLTD 137 (CanLII), per Goodridge J citing McWilliams’ at para 13:40.50