Allan S. Manson

The appellant was convicted of first degree murder.

At trial, the Crown introduced evidence of communications the appellant made to her church pastor and a lay counsellor, in which she admitted her involvement in the murder.

The appellant argued these communications were privileged under common law and s. 2(a) of the Charter.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that there is no prima facie common law privilege for religious communications.

Instead, claims of privilege for such communications must be determined on a case-by-case basis using the Wigmore criteria, informed by the Charter.

Applying the Wigmore criteria, the Court found the communications were not privileged because they did not originate in a confidence that they would not be disclosed.

The appeal was dismissed.

The Supreme Court of Canada heard two appeals concerning the legality of 'gating' an inmate upon release on mandatory supervision.

The Crown appealed the Ontario Court of Appeal's decision granting habeas corpus to an inmate, while another inmate appealed the Alberta Court of Appeal's decision denying habeas corpus.

The Court delivered an oral judgment adopting the reasoning of the lower courts that gating is illegal under the Parole Act and the Penitentiary Act.

The Crown's appeal was dismissed, and the inmate's appeal was allowed, resulting in the immediate release of the inmates.