R. v. W. (A.)
Court headnote
R. v. W. (A.) Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1995-11-10 Report [1995] 4 SCR 51 Case number 24414 Judges La Forest, Gérard V.; Sopinka, John; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; Iacobucci, Frank; Major, John C. On appeal from Ontario Subjects Criminal law Notes SCC Case Information: 24414 Decision Content R. v. W. (A.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 51 A. W. Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Indexed as: R. v. W. (A.) File No.: 24414. 1995: November 10. Present: La Forest, Sopinka, Gonthier, Iacobucci and Major JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario Criminal law ‑‑ Trial ‑‑ Procedure ‑‑ Evidence ‑‑ Trial judge intervening extensively in examination of witnesses ‑‑ Whether or not inadmissible expressions of opinion sufficiently prejudicial to render trial unfair. APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (1994), 94 C.C.C. (3d) 441, 75 O.A.C. 130, dismissing an appeal from conviction by Dandie J. Appeal allowed, Gonthier J. dissenting. Brian H. Greenspan and Sharon E. Lavine, for the appellant. Ian R. Smith, for the respondent. //La Forest J.// The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by 1 La Forest J. ‑‑ The majority is of the view that the appeal should be allowed for the reasons given by the dissenting judge, Brooke J.A. in the Court of Appeal (1994), 94 C.C.C. (3d) 441, 75 O.A.C. 130. The appeal is accordingly allowed, the conviction is set aside and a new trial is ordered. Gonthier J., dissenting, would have dismissed the appeal for the reasons of…
Full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.scc-csc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
R. v. W. (A.) Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 1995-11-10 Report [1995] 4 SCR 51 Case number 24414 Judges La Forest, Gérard V.; Sopinka, John; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; Iacobucci, Frank; Major, John C. On appeal from Ontario Subjects Criminal law Notes SCC Case Information: 24414 Decision Content R. v. W. (A.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 51 A. W. Appellant v. Her Majesty The Queen Respondent Indexed as: R. v. W. (A.) File No.: 24414. 1995: November 10. Present: La Forest, Sopinka, Gonthier, Iacobucci and Major JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario Criminal law ‑‑ Trial ‑‑ Procedure ‑‑ Evidence ‑‑ Trial judge intervening extensively in examination of witnesses ‑‑ Whether or not inadmissible expressions of opinion sufficiently prejudicial to render trial unfair. APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (1994), 94 C.C.C. (3d) 441, 75 O.A.C. 130, dismissing an appeal from conviction by Dandie J. Appeal allowed, Gonthier J. dissenting. Brian H. Greenspan and Sharon E. Lavine, for the appellant. Ian R. Smith, for the respondent. //La Forest J.// The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by 1 La Forest J. ‑‑ The majority is of the view that the appeal should be allowed for the reasons given by the dissenting judge, Brooke J.A. in the Court of Appeal (1994), 94 C.C.C. (3d) 441, 75 O.A.C. 130. The appeal is accordingly allowed, the conviction is set aside and a new trial is ordered. Gonthier J., dissenting, would have dismissed the appeal for the reasons of Arbour J.A. Judgment accordingly. Solicitors for the appellant: Greenspan, Humphrey, Toronto. Solicitor for the respondent: The Attorney General for Ontario, Toronto.
Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca
R v Brown
[2022] 1 SCR 506