Kienapple (Cases): Difference between revisions

From Criminal Law Notebook
No edit summary
Line 14: Line 14:
| {{CanLIIRPC-S|John v The Queen|1ftxp|1985 CanLII 15 (SCC)|, [1985] 2 SCR 476}}{{perSCC|Estey and Lamer JJ}}||  
| {{CanLIIRPC-S|John v The Queen|1ftxp|1985 CanLII 15 (SCC)|, [1985] 2 SCR 476}}{{perSCC|Estey and Lamer JJ}}||  
|-
|-
{{CanLIIRP-S|Davis|1fql7|1999 CanLII 638 (SCC)|, [1999] 3 SCR 759}}{{perSCC|Lamer CJ}}||
|{{CanLIIRP-S|Davis|1fql7|1999 CanLII 638 (SCC)|, [1999] 3 SCR 759}}{{perSCC|Lamer CJ}}||
|-
|-
|{{CanLIIRP-S|Prince|1ftr3|1986 CanLII 40 (SCC)|, [1986] 2 SCR 480}}{{perSCC|Dickson CJ}}||
|{{CanLIIRP-S|Prince|1ftr3|1986 CanLII 40 (SCC)|, [1986] 2 SCR 480}}{{perSCC|Dickson CJ}}||

Revision as of 20:45, 7 March 2021

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