Spousal Immunity: Difference between revisions

From Criminal Law Notebook
Line 31: Line 31:
|[http://canlii.ca/t/52hk6#sec4 CEA]
|[http://canlii.ca/t/52hk6#sec4 CEA]
}}
}}
; Common law partners
The rule of spousal privilege does not apply to those in common law relationships.<ref>
{{CanLIIR|Nguyen|ghblp|2015 ONCA 278 (CanLII)}}{{perONCA|Gillese JA}}
</ref>


; Competence for Defence
; Competence for Defence

Revision as of 13:52, 5 March 2020

General Principles

See also: Privilege

Spousal Competence

See also: Competence and Compellability
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(4) and (5) [Repealed, 2015, c. 13, s. 52]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


Common law partners

The rule of spousal privilege does not apply to those in common law relationships.[2]

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).[3]

  1. R v Hawkins, 1996 CanLII 154 (SCC), [1996] 3 SCR 1043, per Lamer CJ and Iacobucci J
  2. R v Nguyen, 2015 ONCA 278 (CanLII), per Gillese JA
  3. 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] The privilege belongs to the recipient spouse.

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]

  1. See McWilliams' Canadian Criminal Evidence, 4th ed., vol. 1, looseleaf (Aurora, ON: Canada Law Book, 2010) at para 13:40.10
  2. R v Zylstra, 1995 CanLII 893 (ON CA), per curiam
  3. R v RRW (No. 2), 2010 NLTD 137 (CanLII), per Goodridge J citing McWilliams’ at para 13:40.50

See Also