Wendy Rubin

The appellant appealed his conviction for sexual offences, arguing that the trial judge failed to adequately charge the jury on reasonable doubt and the theory of the defence.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, substantially for the dissenting reasons of Donald J.A. at the British Columbia Court of Appeal.

The Crown appealed a decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal that had overturned the accused's convictions for indecent assault and gross indecency and ordered a new trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, finding that the Court of Appeal erred in concluding the trial judge misapprehended the evidence.

The Court held there was sufficient evidence in the complainant's testimony to support the finding of guilt, which turned largely on credibility assessments properly made by the trial judge.

The conviction was restored.

The Crown appealed a decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal regarding a mandatory firearms prohibition order.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal for the reasons of Chief Justice McEachern, setting aside the order of the Court of Appeal and restoring the trial judge's imposition of a ten-year firearms prohibition.

The appellant was convicted of five counts of sexual assault.

During deliberations, the jury requested further instructions on the definition of reasonable doubt.

In his recharge, the trial judge instructed the jury that they must be unanimous in their doubt to give the benefit of that doubt to the accused.

The Supreme Court of Canada held that this instruction was a clear error that tainted the earlier instructions on reasonable doubt, creating a reasonable possibility that the jury was misled.

The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered.