R v Beaver

Beaver applied the Grant framework to a complex sequence: an unlawful arrest followed by an interrogation in which the accused confessed. The SCC clarified that no single Grant factor is determinative; the long-term repute of the administration of justice requires holistic balancing.

Beaver and Lambert were arrested for the murder of their roommate. The arrest was unlawful (no reasonable grounds). They were re-arrested lawfully and interrogated. Beaver confessed.

How does Grant apply to a sequence of breach and lawful police steps?

Confession admitted. Conviction restored.

Section 24(2) requires holistic balancing of the three Grant factors with reference to the long-term repute of the administration of justice. No factor is automatically determinative. Where unlawful state conduct is followed by intervening lawful steps and the impact on the accused is attenuated, admission may follow even where the initial breach was serious.

Jamal J emphasised that Grant is calibrated to the long-term reputation of the system, not to a mechanical formula. Police misconduct must be addressed; but where the prosecutorial chain of evidence has been substantially purified by intervening lawful steps and the offence is serious, exclusion is not automatic.

Refines the application of Grant. Together with Le (2019) on systemic-racism context and Tim (2022) on impact analysis, Beaver shapes contemporary s.24(2) jurisprudence.

R v Beaver, 2022 SCC 54, [2022] 1 SCR 743.

Wagner CJ, Moldaver J, Karakatsanis J, Côté J, Brown J, Rowe J, Martin J, Kasirer J, Jamal J, O'Bonsawin J