Rocky Kravetsky

The appellant challenged Law Society rules making continuing professional development mandatory and authorizing administrative suspension for non-compliance without an express hearing or appeal process.

The majority held law society rules are reviewed for reasonableness and are valid if consistent with the enabling statute’s purpose, wording, and scheme.

It concluded the Law Society’s broad public-interest mandate and rule-making powers authorized mandatory education standards enforced by temporary suspension.

The majority further held the absence of codified hearing and appeal rights in the rules did not render them unreasonable in this declaratory challenge.

The appeal was dismissed, with a dissent finding automatic suspension manifestly unjust.

The accused was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference against his nine-year-old granddaughter.

At trial, the Crown introduced a videotaped interview of the complainant pursuant to s. 715.1 of the Criminal Code.

The accused challenged the constitutionality of the provision, arguing it violated his rights to a fair trial and fundamental justice under ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Charter.

The Supreme Court of Canada upheld the constitutionality of s. 715.1, finding that it does not offend the rules against hearsay or prior consistent statements, nor does it violate the right to cross-examine, as the complainant must adopt the video contents while testifying.

The Court emphasized the need to accommodate child witnesses in the justice system and reinstated the accused's conviction.