Criminal Law Concepts and Causation Quiz

Criminal Law - Fall 2024 Notes

• Criminal law is a system of public proscription and punishment that regulates violence
• Criminal law proscribes conduct
• Other areas of law focus on what to do in a specific situation or wrong, criminal law focuses on what you cannot do
• Criminal law involves imposing punishment on individuals for harming others
• The state is responsible for seeking punishment for crimes
• Criminal law is influenced by the political and social climate of the time
• Criminal laws are not always neutral, they can reflect political biases
• The Constitution Act, 1867, outlines the division of powers between the federal and provincial governments regarding criminal law
• Federal government has jurisdiction over criminal law
• Provincial governments have jurisdiction over the administration of justice in the province.
• Federal/provincial jurisdiction over criminal law and the administration of justice can overlap

Constitutional Context

• Criminal law must be consistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter)
• The Charter may place limits on state
• The Charter protects individual rights
• Provincial legislation exceeding constitutional limitations can be considered ultra vires and thus invalid
• Section 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867, gives the federal government authority to legislate
• Section 92(14) of the Constitution Act, 1867, gives the provinces authority over the administration of justice
• Section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, states that any law inconsistent with the Constitution will be invalid to the extent of the inconsistency
• Section 25 of the Charter protects Aboriginal rights

Indigenous Law

• Section 25 of the Charter recognizes Aboriginal rights.
• Aboriginal rights are protected by the Charter
• Aboriginal rights may arise from treaties, Royal Proclamation of 1763 and land claims agreements
• The guarantee that Charter provides may not override any Aboriginal rights.
• R v Ippak (2018 NUCA 3) deals with Indigenous law and the exclusion of evidence in a case involving marijuana and a search that violated Indigenous law.

What Makes Law "Criminal"

• Switzman v Elbing and AG of Quebec (1957): Quebec's attempt to regulate communist materials was declared unconstitutional because the law interfered under the federal jurisdiction over property and civil rights
• R v Mortgentaler (1993): Alberta’s law prohibiting abortions outside of a hospital was ruled ultra vires. It dealt with federal limits on provincial powers, not about the practice itself.
• Reference Re Firearms (2000): The issue pertains to the division of power regarding fire arms regulation

The Criminal Code

• The Criminal Code consolidated all criminal laws into a single document, making it easier to apply and understand the law

Exhaustivity and the Criminal Code

• Laws and punishments should be codified (no crime or punishment without law)

Common Law Offences and Defences

• Criminal common law offences are no longer applicable as it is an implicit assumption of exhaustivity
• Common law offences can still exist through established precedent
• Courts cannot create new common law criminal offences.
• Exceptions to the general rule include contempt of court.
• Common law defences are still recognized
• Defences need not be explicitly named/provided for in the Criminal Code, established precedent or statutory interpretation can bring them into existence
• Accused can rely on common law defences

Quantum and Burden of Proof

• Presumption of Innocence: Accused is assumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
• Woolmington v DPP ([1935]): Established the principle that the burden of proof rests on the Crown to prove beyond a reasonable doubt all elements of the offence, not on the accused to prove their innocence.

Conduct or Actus Reus

• Actus Reus (guilty act): actions/omissions (with conditions/circumstances), voluntary
• Voluntariness: The accused's actions need to be voluntary; actions taken while unconscious or not in control are not voluntary.
• Acts and Omissions: Criminal liability can exist for omissions, but it depends on whether a legal duty to act exists.
• R v Larsonneur (1934): Accused deported from a country against their will, their actions weren’t considered voluntary in this case.
• R v Kilbride (1962): Court of Appeal held that the presence of a driver's license in the car did not meet the required legal test for strict liability (it was a reasonable response and not an act that was voluntary or caused the offense)
• R v King (1962): Court considered medical issues as intervening acts

Causation

• Factual Causation: "But for" test. Would the result have occurred without the accused's actions?
• Legal Causation: The accused’s actions must be a significant cause of the harm or result.
• Intervening Acts: An intervening event can break the causal link (if the intervening act was unforeseeable).
• Thin Skull Rule: In criminal law, the defendant takes the victim as they find them, with their pre-existing conditions.
• R v Winning (1973): Court focused on whether the false representations were the direct cause of the accused's getting credit from the company.
• R v Gentles (2016): Court considered factors regarding whether the accused's actions were the substantial cause of the victims death

Mistake of Fact

• Mistake of fact has to be objectively correct to be considered a valid defense
• Amato v The Queen [1982]: Crown must prove all elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
• ignorance of the law is not a defence for crimes or regulatory offenses