Paul S. O'Brien

The accused was arrested for robbery, consulted counsel, and stated he did not wish to make a statement to the police.

He was then placed in a cell with an undercover police officer who engaged him in conversation and elicited incriminating statements.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that the accused's right to remain silent under section 7 of the Charter was violated by the police trickery.

The Court concluded that the admission of the conscripted statements would render the trial unfair and bring the administration of justice into disrepute, excluding the evidence under section 24(2) and restoring the acquittal.

The parties entered into a separation agreement, incorporated into their divorce decree, which provided that spousal maintenance would cease if the wife cohabited with another man for more than 90 days.

The wife subsequently cohabited with another man, and the husband ceased payments.

The wife, who eventually required social assistance, applied to vary the decree nisi to reinstate maintenance.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the cohabitation clause was valid and enforceable.

Applying the Pelech test, the Court found no radical change in circumstances related to a pattern of economic dependency generated by the marriage that would justify interfering with the settlement agreement.