Hyperlawhypertext legal database R. v. Brown [1982] 1 SCR 859

← Cases

R. v. Brown

[1982] 1 SCR 859 Court SCC Decision date 1982-06-10 Docket 16638 English

PartiesHer Majesty The Queen Appellant·Ronald Allan Brown Respondent

Counsel (4)
Y. Roslak, Q.C., and David Plosz, for the appellant.
R.H. Davidson, for the respondent.
Solicitor for the appellant: Peter Teasdale, agent of the Attorney General, Edmonton.
Solicitor for the respondent: R.H. Davidson, Edmonton.

Judges Ritchie, Roland Almon; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Beetz, Jean; Estey, Willard Zebedee; McIntyre, William Rogers; Chouinard, Julien; Wilson, Bertha

Decision 6–1 Majority (6) · RITCHIE J. (1)

On appeal from Alberta

Subjects Appeal

Contents

Majority

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

RITCHIE J.

RITCHIE J.—We are all of the opinion that the majority of the Court of Appeal erred in law in allowing the appellant’s appeal from his conviction and directing a new trial when he had not satisfied the first principle of the test for admitting fresh evidence, namely, whether the evidence sought to be adduced could by due diligence have been adduced at trial.
The appeal is allowed, the judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside and the judgment at trial is restored.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellant: Peter Teasdale, agent of the Attorney General, Edmonton.
Solicitor for the respondent: R.H. Davidson, Edmonton.