2 total
Conflicting evidence and credibility concerns required acquittals on both assault charges.
Following a brief criminal trial arising from a domestic physical altercation between spouses, the court considered whether the prosecution had proven assault with a weapon and simple assault beyond a reasonable doubt.
The case turned entirely on conflicting testimony from the complainant and the accused, together with photographs of injuries said to support each side's narrative.
Applying the W.(D.) framework and the principles governing circumstantial evidence, the court found the complainant not credible, identified significant inconsistencies and implausibilities in his account, and held that the photographs did not reliably establish how the injuries were caused.
The accused's evidence was found compelling and, in any event, raised a reasonable doubt.
Acquittals were entered on both charges.
A son's claim against his late mother's estate for a property interest was dismissed due to lack of corroboration and expired limitation periods.
This decision addresses an application by Kirk Neita against his late mother's intestate estate, claiming a 50% ownership interest in a property transferred to his mother in 2010, alleging fraud and improper use of a power of attorney.
The court dismissed Neita's application, primarily on two grounds: first, his evidence lacked the material corroboration required by section 13 of the Evidence Act for claims against a deceased's estate; and second, his claim was barred by the 2-year limitation period under the Trustee Act, which was found to apply over the 10-year Real Property Limitations Act.
The court also rejected Neita's argument that the discoverability principle extended the limitation period, finding he knew or ought to have known of the transfer in 2010.
