Charter Remedies: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
m Text replacement - "{{perSCC|M" to "{{perSCC-H|M" |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Where there is an error in principle, relies on irrelevant factors, or is unreasonable, the appellate court may intervene.<Ref> | Where there is an error in principle, relies on irrelevant factors, or is unreasonable, the appellate court may intervene.<Ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Babos|g36g4|2014 SCC 16 (CanLII)|[2014] 1 SCR 309}}{{perSCC|Moldaver J}}{{atsL|g36g4|48| to 49}} | {{CanLIIRP|Babos|g36g4|2014 SCC 16 (CanLII)|[2014] 1 SCR 309}}{{perSCC-H|Moldaver J}}{{atsL|g36g4|48| to 49}} | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
Revision as of 22:28, 30 April 2023
| This page was last substantively updated or reviewed January 2016. (Rev. # 85594) |
Section 24(1) of the Charter
The choice of remedy upon violation of a constitutional provision is entitled to discretion.[1]
Where there is an error in principle, relies on irrelevant factors, or is unreasonable, the appellate court may intervene.[2]
- Unreasonable Detention
Where an officer detains someone for longer than what is permitted under s. 503(1)(a), the remedies include sentence credit at sentencing.[3]
- Abuse of Process
- ↑
R v Simpson, 1995 CanLII 120 (SCC), [1995] 1 SCR 449 rev’g (1994), 1994 CanLII 4528 (NL CA), 117 Nfld & PEIR 110, at paras 67 to 69 (CCC)
- ↑ R v Babos, 2014 SCC 16 (CanLII), [2014] 1 SCR 309, per Moldaver J, at paras 48 to 49
- ↑
R v B(S), 2014 ONCA 527 (CanLII), 121 OR (3d) 145, per Rosenberg JA, at para 13
R v Rashid, 2010 ONCA 591 (CanLII), 259 CCC (3d) 289, per curiam, at paras 6-7