Hyperlawhypertext legal database R. v. Luxton [1990] 2 SCR 711

← Cases

R. v. Luxton

[1990] 2 SCR 711 Court SCC Decision date 1990-09-13 Docket 21252 English

PartiesRobert Nelson Luxton Appellant·Her Majesty The Queen Respondent·The Attorney General of Canada Interveners·the Attorney General for Ontario Interveners·the Attorney General of Quebec Interveners·the Attorney General of Manitoba and the Attorney General of British Columbia Interveners

Judges Dickson, Robert George Brian; Lamer, Antonio; Wilson, Bertha; L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Sopinka, John; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; Cory, Peter deCarteret

Delivered by Majority

On appeal from Alberta

Subjects Constitutional law Criminal law

Contents
Does s. 230(a) [then s. 213(a)] of the Criminal Code contravene the rights and freedoms guaranteed by s. 7 and/or s. 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?
If the answer to question 1 is affirmative, is s. 230(a) [then s. 213(a)] of the Criminal Code justified by s. 1 of the Charter and therefore not inconsistent with the Constitution Act, 1982 ?
Is s. 231(5)(e) [then s. 214(5)(e)] of the Criminal Code inconsistent with s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?
Is s. 231(5)(e) [then s. 214(5)(e)] in combination with s. 742(a) [then s. 669(a)] of the Criminal Code inconsistent with ss. 7, 9 and, or in the alternative, s. 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ?
Does s. 231(5)(e) [then s. 214(5)(e)] in combination with s. 742 [then s. 669] of the Criminal Code abrogate or infringe the rights guaranteed by s. 2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights?
If the answer to questions 3 or 4 is in the affirmative, is s. 231(5)(e) [then s. 214(5)(e)] justified by s. 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and therefore not inconsistent with the Constitution Act, 1982 ?

Footnotes

  1. [1] * Chief Justice at the time of hearing.
  2. [2] ** Chief Justice at the time of judgment.

Statutes and regulations cited