R. v. R.G.L.
Court headnote
R. v. R.G.L. Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 2005-04-14 Neutral citation 2005 SCC 18 Report [2005] 1 SCR 288 Case number 30376 Judges McLachlin, Beverley; Major, John C.; Bastarache, Michel; Binnie, William Ian Corneil; LeBel, Louis; Deschamps, Marie; Fish, Morris J.; Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Charron, Louise On appeal from Ontario Subjects Criminal law Notes SCC Case Information: 30376 Decision Content SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Citation: R. v. R.G.L., [2005] 1 S.C.R. 288, 2005 SCC 18 Date: 20050414 Docket: 30376 Between: Her Majesty the Queen Appellant v. R.L. Respondent Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. Reasons for judgment: (para. 1) The Court ______________________________ R. v. R.G.L., [2005] 1 S.C.R. 288, 2005 SCC 18 Her Majesty The Queen Appellant v. R.L. Respondent Indexed as: R. v. R.G.L. Neutral citation: 2005 SCC 18. File No.: 30376. 2005: February 11; 2005: April 14. Present: McLachlin C.J. and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario Criminal law — Appeal — Appeal as of right — Dissent in Court of Appeal not raising question of law — Appeal quashed. Statutes and Regulations Cited Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 693(1) (a). APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (Weiler, Laskin and Feldman JJ.A.) (2004), 186 O.A.C. 355, 185 C.C.C. (3d) 55, [2004] O.J. No. 1944 (QL), setting aside the accused…
Full judgment (source text)
Mirrored from decisions.scc-csc.ca — the linked original is authoritative.
R. v. R.G.L. Collection Supreme Court Judgments Date 2005-04-14 Neutral citation 2005 SCC 18 Report [2005] 1 SCR 288 Case number 30376 Judges McLachlin, Beverley; Major, John C.; Bastarache, Michel; Binnie, William Ian Corneil; LeBel, Louis; Deschamps, Marie; Fish, Morris J.; Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Charron, Louise On appeal from Ontario Subjects Criminal law Notes SCC Case Information: 30376 Decision Content SUPREME COURT OF CANADA Citation: R. v. R.G.L., [2005] 1 S.C.R. 288, 2005 SCC 18 Date: 20050414 Docket: 30376 Between: Her Majesty the Queen Appellant v. R.L. Respondent Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. Reasons for judgment: (para. 1) The Court ______________________________ R. v. R.G.L., [2005] 1 S.C.R. 288, 2005 SCC 18 Her Majesty The Queen Appellant v. R.L. Respondent Indexed as: R. v. R.G.L. Neutral citation: 2005 SCC 18. File No.: 30376. 2005: February 11; 2005: April 14. Present: McLachlin C.J. and Major, Bastarache, Binnie, LeBel, Deschamps, Fish, Abella and Charron JJ. on appeal from the court of appeal for ontario Criminal law — Appeal — Appeal as of right — Dissent in Court of Appeal not raising question of law — Appeal quashed. Statutes and Regulations Cited Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 693(1) (a). APPEAL from a judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal (Weiler, Laskin and Feldman JJ.A.) (2004), 186 O.A.C. 355, 185 C.C.C. (3d) 55, [2004] O.J. No. 1944 (QL), setting aside the accused’s convictions and ordering a new trial. Appeal quashed. Riun Shandler and Benita Wassenaar, for the appellant. Paul Burstein, for the respondent. The following is the judgment delivered by 1 The Court — We are of the view that the dissent in the Court of Appeal does not raise an issue of law, as required by s. 693(1) (a) of the Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C‑46 . Accordingly, the appeal is quashed. Appeal quashed. Solicitor for the appellant: Ministry of the Attorney General, Toronto. Solicitors for the respondent: Burstein, Unger, Toronto.
Source: decisions.scc-csc.ca
R v Brown
[2022] 1 SCR 506