Hyperlawhypertext legal database R. v. Feeney [1997] 2 SCR 13

← Cases

R. v. Feeney

[1997] 2 SCR 13 Court SCC Decision date 1997-05-22 Docket 24752 English

PartiesMichael Feeney Appellant·Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

Judges Lamer, Antonio; La Forest, Gérard V.; L'Heureux-Dubé, Claire; Sopinka, John; Gonthier, Charles Doherty; Cory, Peter deCarteret; McLachlin, Beverley; Iacobucci, Frank; Major, John C.

Delivered by Lamer C.J. (dissenting)

On appeal from British Columbia

Subjects Constitutional law Criminal law

Contents

Lamer C.J. (dissenting)

The Chief Justice (dissenting) -- I have had the benefit of the reasons of both of my colleagues, Justice L’Heureux-Dubé and Justice Sopinka, and cannot agree with either of them. I do agree with L’Heureux-Dubé J. in the result, but substantially for the reasons given by Lambert J.A. of the Court of Appeal of British Columbia (1995), 54 B.C.A.C. 228.
My reasons and conclusion are not to be taken as disagreeing in any way with the principles of R. v. Stillman, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 607, as expressed in the reasons of Sopinka J. I agree with those principles as stated therein. My disagreement is with their application on the facts of this case.
I would accordingly dismiss this appeal.

Footnotes

  1. [1] * See: [1997] 2 S.C.R. 117.

Cases cited