Gil D. McKinnon

The accused was charged with breaking and entering and possession of break-in instruments after an apartment manager found two men in a parkade and was handed the accused's expired driver's licence.

At trial, the accused did not testify.

The trial judge convicted the accused, relying in part on the accused's failure to testify to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Court of Appeal set aside the conviction and ordered a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the Crown's appeal, holding that the right to silence and the presumption of innocence preclude a trier of fact from using an accused's silence at trial as inculpatory evidence to help establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The taxpayer was convicted for failing to comply with the Minister's demand for information under the Income Tax Act.

The Minister subsequently made a second demand for the same information, and the taxpayer was convicted again.

The Court of Appeal set aside the second conviction, holding that only one demand could be made.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the Crown's appeal, holding that further demands by the Minister create fresh time periods for compliance and fresh offences for non-compliance, as the purpose of the provisions is to enforce compliance with the self-assessment system of taxation.