Hyperlawhypertext legal database Rhynard et al. v. The Queen [1981] 1 SCR 564

← Cases

Rhynard et al. v. The Queen

[1981] 1 SCR 564 Court SCC Decision date 1981-06-11 English

PartiesCharlton Lionel Rhynard and Gary Wayne Allen Appellants·Her Majesty The Queen Respondent

Counsel (4)
Walter Newton and Steven Enman, for the appellants.
Martin Herschorn and Dana Giovannetti, for the respondent.
Solicitor for the appellants: Walter D. Newton, Kentville, Nova Scotia.
Solicitor for the respondent: The Attorney General for Nova Scotia, Halifax.

Judges Laskin, Bora; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Dickson, Robert George Brian; Estey, Willard Zebedee; McIntyre, William Rogers; Chouinard, Julien; Lamer, Antonio

Delivered by Majority

On appeal from Nova Scotia

Subjects Criminal law

Contents

The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by

THE CHIEF JUSTICE—We do not need to hear you, Mr. Herschorn and Mr. Giovannetti. The only issue in this case, involving a charge of indecent assault, was consent, and on this issue, there was the uncontradicted evidence of the complainant that there was no consent. In the circumstances, we find no reversible error in the charge of the trial judge who pointed to the danger of convicting on the complainant’s evidence alone, although he did not give the so‑called Binet warning when there were the prior inconsistent sworn and unsworn statements of the complainant. As
[Page 565]
was noted by Davey J.A. in R. v. Rustad[2], the obligation of a trial judge to give the Binet warning depends on the circumstances and on the issues. Those in this case did not require the trial judge to go farther than he did.
The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitor for the appellants: Walter D. Newton, Kentville, Nova Scotia.
Solicitor for the respondent: The Attorney General for Nova Scotia, Halifax.

Footnotes

  1. [1] (1980), 41 N.S.R. (2d) 104.
  2. [2] [1965] 1 C.C.C. 323.