« Présomptions » : différence entre les versions
m Remplacement de texte : « Making Sexually Explicit Materials Available to Child (Offence) » par « Rendre accessible à un enfant du matériel sexuellement explicite (infraction) » |
m Remplacement de texte : « SCR » par « RCS » |
||
| Ligne 18 : | Ligne 18 : | ||
Evidence to the contrary "is evidence which is not rejected and which raises a reasonable doubt as to the existence of the presumed fact."<ref> | Evidence to the contrary "is evidence which is not rejected and which raises a reasonable doubt as to the existence of the presumed fact."<ref> | ||
{{ibid1|Boyle}}<br> | {{ibid1|Boyle}}<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Proudlock|1mktb|1978 CanLII 15 (SCC)|[1979] 1 | {{CanLIIRP|Proudlock|1mktb|1978 CanLII 15 (SCC)|[1979] 1 RCS 525}}{{perSCC|Estey J}}<br> | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
However, any evidence that is rejected or disbelieved is not ETTC.<ref> | However, any evidence that is rejected or disbelieved is not ETTC.<ref> | ||
| Ligne 33 : | Ligne 33 : | ||
The ETTC standard does not create any persuasive or ultimate burden on a balance of probabilities.<ref> | The ETTC standard does not create any persuasive or ultimate burden on a balance of probabilities.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Proudlock|1mktb|1978 CanLII 15 (SCC)|[1979] 1 | {{CanLIIRP|Proudlock|1mktb|1978 CanLII 15 (SCC)|[1979] 1 RCS 525}}{{perSCC|Pigeon J}}{{atp|28}}<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Dubois|1ph7c|1990 CanLII 2776 (QC CA)|62 CCC (3d) 90}}{{perQCCA|Fish JA}}{{atp|92}}<br> | {{CanLIIRP|Dubois|1ph7c|1990 CanLII 2776 (QC CA)|62 CCC (3d) 90}}{{perQCCA|Fish JA}}{{atp|92}}<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Gibson|1nh94|1992 CanLII 2750 (SK CA)|72 CCC (3d) 28}}{{perSKCA|Bayda CJ}}{{atp|38}}<br> | {{CanLIIRP|Gibson|1nh94|1992 CanLII 2750 (SK CA)|72 CCC (3d) 28}}{{perSKCA|Bayda CJ}}{{atp|38}}<br> | ||
| Ligne 46 : | Ligne 46 : | ||
These code provisions will tend to violate s. 11(b) Charter rights by shifting the burden onto the accused. However, can remain in force under s.1 as a reasonable limitation.<ref> | These code provisions will tend to violate s. 11(b) Charter rights by shifting the burden onto the accused. However, can remain in force under s.1 as a reasonable limitation.<ref> | ||
e.g. {{CanLIIRP|Downey|1fsbb|1992 CanLII 109 (SCC)|[1992] 2 | e.g. {{CanLIIRP|Downey|1fsbb|1992 CanLII 109 (SCC)|[1992] 2 RCS 10}}{{perSCC|Cory J}}</ref> | ||
; Effect of Satisfying ETTC | ; Effect of Satisfying ETTC | ||
| Ligne 73 : | Ligne 73 : | ||
==Reverse Onuses== | ==Reverse Onuses== | ||
Where a presumption places a reverse onus upon the defence, the burden must always be on a balance of probabilities.<ref> | Where a presumption places a reverse onus upon the defence, the burden must always be on a balance of probabilities.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Tupper|1tvtv|1967 CanLII 14 (SCC)|[1967] | {{CanLIIRP|Tupper|1tvtv|1967 CanLII 14 (SCC)|[1967] RCS 589}}{{perSCC|Judson J}}<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Appleby|1nfms|1971 CanLII 4 (SCC)|[1972] | {{CanLIIRP|Appleby|1nfms|1971 CanLII 4 (SCC)|[1972] RCS 303}}{{perSCC|Ritchie J}}<br> | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
| Ligne 93 : | Ligne 93 : | ||
==Common Law Presumptions== | ==Common Law Presumptions== | ||
A person who possesses stolen property is presumed to have knowledge of its source.<ref> | A person who possesses stolen property is presumed to have knowledge of its source.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Kowlyk|1ftd7|1988 CanLII 50 (SCC)|[1988] 2 | {{CanLIIRP|Kowlyk|1ftd7|1988 CanLII 50 (SCC)|[1988] 2 RCS 59, [1998] SCJ No 66}}{{perSCC-H|McIntyre J}}<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Russell|gb3zj|1983 CanLII 3491 (NSCA)|4 CCC (3d) 460}}{{perNSCA|Jones JA}} - presumption does not violate s. 11(d)<br> | {{CanLIIRP|Russell|gb3zj|1983 CanLII 3491 (NSCA)|4 CCC (3d) 460}}{{perNSCA|Jones JA}} - presumption does not violate s. 11(d)<br> | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
A person impaired by drugs is presumed to be voluntarily impaired unless evidence establishes otherwise.<ref> | A person impaired by drugs is presumed to be voluntarily impaired unless evidence establishes otherwise.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|King|1tvrn|1962 CanLII 16 (SCC)|[1962] | {{CanLIIRP|King|1tvrn|1962 CanLII 16 (SCC)|[1962] RCS 746}}{{Plurality}}</ref> | ||
There is no legal presumption that those testifying in criminal trials are telling the truth.<ref> | There is no legal presumption that those testifying in criminal trials are telling the truth.<ref> | ||
| Ligne 146 : | Ligne 146 : | ||
With the presumption of sanity, the defence must prove lack of sanity on a balance of probabilities.<ref> | With the presumption of sanity, the defence must prove lack of sanity on a balance of probabilities.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Hebert|22tnw|1954 CanLII 48 (SCC)|[1955] | {{CanLIIRP|Hebert|22tnw|1954 CanLII 48 (SCC)|[1955] RCS 120}}{{perSCC|Kerwin CJ}}<br> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Smyth|gwb83|1940 CanLII 384 (SCC)|[1941] | {{CanLIIRP|Smyth|gwb83|1940 CanLII 384 (SCC)|[1941] RCS 17}}{{perSCC|Duff CJ}}<br> | ||
</ref>The same standard applies if raised by the Crown.<ref> | </ref>The same standard applies if raised by the Crown.<ref> | ||
{{CanLIIRP|Simpson|g1dvj|1977 CanLII 1142 (ON CA)|35 CCC (2d) 337}}{{perONCA-H|Martin JA}}<br> | {{CanLIIRP|Simpson|g1dvj|1977 CanLII 1142 (ON CA)|35 CCC (2d) 337}}{{perONCA-H|Martin JA}}<br> | ||