Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora

R v L & L (1994)

  • Clayton Rice, K.C.

Mr Rice was retained by one of the two defendants in this case to appeal her convictions for aggravated assault and failing to provide the necessaries of life. During the Crown Attorney’s cross-examination of her at trial, it came to light that he was using information that had not been disclosed to the defence. The trial judge dismissed applications for a stay of proceedings or a mistrial. The Alberta Court of Appeal held that there was no doubt that the Crown Attorney had a duty to disclose the information to the defendants prior to trial. Springing the information on the defendant during cross-examination was prejudicial and resulted in an unfair trial. The appeal was granted and a new trial was ordered.

Comments are closed.