Knowledge (XXG)

R v Hess; R v Nguyen

Source đź“ť

29: 231:
element in establishing the offence as the accused did not need to know the girl's age. Wilson noted that a provision that convicts morally innocent individuals as a means to control a certain area of crime is inconsistent with the principles of fundamental justice. She further noted that this form
177: 210:
In Nguyen's trial, he was convicted, which was upheld on appeal. The court did not find a violation of section 15, but there was a violation of section 7, which was saved under section 1.
200:. The provision specifically prohibited a male from having sex with a female under the age of fourteen "whether or not he believes that she is fourteen years of age or more". 194:
Victor Hess and Van Nguyen were both charged in two separate incidents with having sexual intercourse with a female under the age of fourteen contrary to section 146(1) of the
306: 286: 301: 182: 311: 239:
the infringing words from the text so that to secure a conviction, it must be proved that the accused knew the girl was under fourteen (or was
336: 326: 105: 321: 232:
of constructive culpability was not proportional and so it could not be justified through judicial discretion.
331: 273: 225:
Justice Wilson, writing for the majority, found a violation of section 7 as the provision did not require a
165: 34: 281: 213:
The question before the Supreme Court was whether the criminal provision violated sections 7 or 15 of the
196: 169: 316: 28: 203:
In Hess's trial, the conviction was quashed on the basis that the offence violated section 15 of the
277: 101: 121: 240: 153:
Dickson C.J., Cory and Sopinka JJ. took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
113: 295: 97: 93: 86: 60: 109: 207:. The verdict was overturned at the Court of Appeal and a new trial was ordered. 54:
Victor John Hess v Her Majesty The Queen; Van Hung Nguyen v Her Majesty The Queen
236: 117: 227: 136:
Wilson J., joined by Lamer C.J.(*) and La Forest and L'Heureux-Dubé JJ.
173: 144: 132: 127: 77: 69: 59: 49: 42: 21: 8: 168:where the Court struck down part of the 252: 183:Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms 18: 164:, 2 S.C.R. 906 is a decision of the 7: 139:(*)Chief Justice at time of judgment 148:McLachlin J., joined by Gonthier J. 14: 307:Section Fifteen Charter case law 287:case summary at mapleleafweb.com 27: 302:Section Seven Charter case law 1: 312:Supreme Court of Canada cases 16:Supreme Court of Canada case 353: 337:Canadian criminal case law 43:Hearing: February 1, 1990 327:1990 in Canadian case law 152: 82: 45:Judgment: October 4, 1990 26: 274:Supreme Court of Canada 235:As a remedy, the Court 166:Supreme Court of Canada 35:Supreme Court of Canada 106:Claire L'Heureux-DubĂ© 221:Opinion of the Court 161:R v Hess; R v Nguyen 22:R v Hess; R v Nguyen 176:as a violation of 122:Beverley McLachlin 322:Sexuality and age 157: 156: 140: 344: 260: 257: 138: 114:Charles Gonthier 102:GĂ©rard La Forest 91:Puisne Justices: 78:Court membership 31: 19: 352: 351: 347: 346: 345: 343: 342: 341: 292: 291: 269: 264: 263: 258: 254: 249: 243:to that fact). 223: 192: 137: 89: 73:Appeal allowed. 44: 38: 17: 12: 11: 5: 350: 348: 340: 339: 334: 332:Rape in Canada 329: 324: 319: 314: 309: 304: 294: 293: 290: 289: 284: 268: 267:External links 265: 262: 261: 251: 250: 248: 245: 241:wilfully blind 222: 219: 191: 188: 155: 154: 150: 149: 146: 142: 141: 134: 130: 129: 125: 124: 84:Chief Justice: 80: 79: 75: 74: 71: 67: 66: 63: 57: 56: 51: 50:Full case name 47: 46: 40: 39: 32: 24: 23: 15: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 349: 338: 335: 333: 330: 328: 325: 323: 320: 318: 315: 313: 310: 308: 305: 303: 300: 299: 297: 288: 285: 283: 279: 275: 272:Full text of 271: 270: 266: 256: 253: 246: 244: 242: 238: 233: 230: 229: 220: 218: 216: 211: 208: 206: 201: 199: 198: 197:Criminal Code 189: 187: 185: 184: 179: 175: 171: 170:Criminal Code 167: 163: 162: 151: 147: 143: 135: 131: 128:Reasons given 126: 123: 119: 115: 111: 107: 103: 99: 98:Bertha Wilson 95: 94:Antonio Lamer 92: 88: 87:Brian Dickson 85: 81: 76: 72: 68: 64: 62: 58: 55: 52: 48: 41: 37: 36: 30: 25: 20: 317:Sex case law 276:decision at 255: 234: 226: 224: 214: 212: 209: 204: 202: 195: 193: 181: 160: 159: 158: 110:John Sopinka 90: 83: 65:2 S.C.R. 906 53: 33: 172:offence of 296:Categories 280: and 247:References 190:Background 118:Peter Cory 178:section 7 61:Citations 259:at p.923 228:mens rea 133:Majority 237:severed 215:Charter 205:Charter 180:of the 145:Dissent 282:CanLII 70:Ruling 278:LexUM 174:rape 298:: 217:. 186:. 120:, 116:, 112:, 108:, 104:, 100:, 96:,

Index

Supreme Court of Canada
Supreme Court of Canada
Citations
Brian Dickson
Antonio Lamer
Bertha Wilson
GĂ©rard La Forest
Claire L'Heureux-Dubé
John Sopinka
Charles Gonthier
Peter Cory
Beverley McLachlin
Supreme Court of Canada
Criminal Code
rape
section 7
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Criminal Code
mens rea
severed
wilfully blind
Supreme Court of Canada
LexUM
CanLII
case summary at mapleleafweb.com
Categories
Section Seven Charter case law
Section Fifteen Charter case law
Supreme Court of Canada cases
Sex case law

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑