Accident and Mistake: Difference between revisions
m Text replacement - "([A-Z][a-z]+){{supra}}" to "{{supra1|$1}}" |
m Text replacement - "}, at para ([0-9][0-9])<br>" to "}{{at|$1}}<br>" |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Most typically accident means that the accused did not mean to perform the ''actus reus'' or that the consequences of the ''actus reus'' were unintended.<ref> | Most typically accident means that the accused did not mean to perform the ''actus reus'' or that the consequences of the ''actus reus'' were unintended.<ref> | ||
''R v Tatton'', [http://canlii.ca/t/g6g9d 2014 ONCA 273] (CanLII){{perONCA|Pardu JA}} | ''R v Tatton'', [http://canlii.ca/t/g6g9d 2014 ONCA 273] (CanLII){{perONCA|Pardu JA}}{{at|24}}<br> | ||
''R v Mathisen'', [http://canlii.ca/t/21dw7 2008 ONCA 747] (CanLII), 239 CCC (3d) 63{{perONCA|Laskin JA}} | ''R v Mathisen'', [http://canlii.ca/t/21dw7 2008 ONCA 747] (CanLII), 239 CCC (3d) 63{{perONCA|Laskin JA}}{{at|70}}<br> | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
Revision as of 00:37, 13 January 2019
- < Criminal Law
- < Defences
General Principles
The defences of accident or mistake will have different meaning depending on the context.
Generally, an accident is a "mishap or untoward event not expected or designed", or "unforeseen contingency or occurrence".[1]
Most typically accident means that the accused did not mean to perform the actus reus or that the consequences of the actus reus were unintended.[2]
The effect in law is that the mens rea is not present. This is distinctive from mistake which occurs in “the realm of perception”.[3]
Burden
Once the accused establishes there is an "air of reality" to the defence of accident or mistake, the crown must disprove the availability of the defence beyond a reasonable doubt. [4]
General or Specific Intent Offences
The meaning of accident varies depending on the type of charge.[5] Where it is a specific intent offence, an accident relates to a denial of voluntariness of the act or denial of intention to cause the outcome. For a general intent offence, an accident requires that the act was unexpected and by chance that was not foreseeable. [6]
- ↑
R v Whitehorne 2005 CanLII 34553 (NLPC), per Gorman J
R v Hill, 1973 CanLII 36, [1975] 2 SCR 402, (1974) 14 CCC (2d) 505 (SCC), per Dickson J at p. 510 - ↑
R v Tatton, 2014 ONCA 273 (CanLII), per Pardu JA, at para 24
R v Mathisen, 2008 ONCA 747 (CanLII), 239 CCC (3d) 63, per Laskin JA, at para 70
- ↑ Whitehorne, supra
- ↑ R v Sutherland, 1993 CanLII 6614 (SK CA), (1994) 84 CCC (3d) 484 (Sask. C.A.), per Vanscise JA, at pp. 497-498
- ↑ see Intention#Specific and General Intent
- ↑
Criminal Pleading & Practice, Ewaschuck, (2nd Edition) at para 21.0030
Mathisen, supra at para 70