Hyperlawhypertext legal database R. v. Gagnon 2018 SCC 41

← Cases

R. v. Gagnon

2018 SCC 41 [2018] 3 SCR 3 Court SCC Decision date 2018-10-16 Heard 2018-10-16 Docket 37972 English

PartiesHer Majesty The Queen Respondent

Counsel (3)
Solicitor for the appellant: Defence Counsel Services, Gatineau.
Solicitor for the respondent: Canadian Military Prosecution Service, Ottawa.
Solicitor for the intervener: Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund Inc., Toronto.

Judges Wagner, Richard; Abella, Rosalie Silberman; Moldaver, Michael J.; Karakatsanis, Andromache; Gascon, Clément; Côté, Suzanne; Brown, Russell; Rowe, Malcolm; Martin, Sheilah

Delivered by Wagner C.J. (Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon, Côté, Brown, Rowe and Martin JJ. concurring)

On appeal from Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada

Contents

Reasons for Judgment — Wagner C.J. (Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Gascon, Côté, Brown, Rowe and Martin JJ. concurring)

The Chief Justice — We are all of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed, substantially for the reasons of the majority of the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada.
However, with respect, on the record before us, we are of the opinion that there was no evidence from which a trier of fact could find that the appellant had taken reasonable steps to ascertain that the complainant was consenting.
In so concluding, we are also of the view that the principles enunciated in R. v. George, 2017 SCC 38, [2017] 1 S.C.R. 1021, are of no assistance in applying s. 273.2 of the Criminal Code , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 .
It follows that the defence of honest but mistaken belief should not have been put to the panel.

Cases cited

Statutes and regulations cited