Wednesday: What’s Hot on CanLII

Each Wednesday we tell you which three English-language cases and which French-language case have been the most viewed* on CanLII and we give you a small sense of what the cases are about.

For this last week:

1. R. v. Pelletier, 2016 ONCJ 628

[9] I will not detail in my decision the trauma you have suffered. Physical, sexual, and emotional trauma. Even when you were so young. A child. To do so in such a public way as in a judicial decision will not help you heal. I will say this though. Ms. Hughes testified that in the years she has worked as a Parole Officer she has never met anyone who has faced so much death in her personal life as you. The suicides. The loss. That really struck me. I will also say that you are a Residential School survivor. You are not ready to reveal all that went on. You have just this spring received almost two hundred thousand dollars in compensation. That can only hint at the experience you had to endure. Let me say this about this compensation. You have shown much wisdom and insight about it. When you were offered an inpatient program in Vancouver, you said no. You were concerned that this would not be a good place to be for a serious addict such as yourself. Especially with this money. You have kept the funds safe. You understand that it can help you forge a new life for yourself. And your son. Let me also say this about the compensation. It can never be enough. It cannot fully restore what was lost. But it is recognition of the injustice done to you and other indigenous people in Canada. It recognizes the truth of what was done. It can be part of the reconciliation needed.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

2. R. v. Nicholson, 2016 ONCA 677

[1] The appellant contends the trial judge did not have jurisdiction over his trial. He is wrong. The appeal is dismissed.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

3. R. v Diamond, 2015 NLCA 60

[30] My colleague concludes that the police officer, in placing his head and hand into the interior of the appellant’s vehicle and scanning it with a flashlight, was not conducting a search. I disagree. The fact determinative of this issue is not that the officer relied on the assistance of a flashlight to illuminate the otherwise dark interior of the vehicle as my colleague contends, but that, without permission, the officer physically placed himself inside the interior of the vehicle, a space where the appellant had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

The most-consulted French-language decision R. c. Huard, 2016 QCCA 1701

[25] Dans un cas comme celui-ci d’un délai dépassant le plafond permis, une « mesure transitoire exceptionnelle » peut s’appliquer « lorsque le ministère public convainc la cour que le temps qui s’est écoulé est justifié du fait que les parties se sont raisonnablement conformées au droit tel qu’il existait au préalable.[19] » Une mesure transitoire exceptionnelle pourrait également s’appliquer dans un cas « moyennement complexe dans une région confrontée à des problèmes de délais institutionnels importants.[20] »

(Check for commentary on CanLII Connects)

* As of January 2014 we measure the total amount of time spent on the pages rather than simply the number of hits; as well, a case once mentioned won’t appear again for three months.

Comments are closed.