CLU3M1 Exam Review PDF

Exam Review: CLU3M1 (Revised version) The exam will have multiple choice, short answer, and long answer questions. ____________________________________________________________________________ Unit 1 What is Law? * Provincial and Federal jurisdictions Provincial jurisdiction is wh...

Exam Review: CLU3M1 (Revised version) The exam will have multiple choice, short answer, and long answer questions. ____________________________________________________________________________ Unit 1 What is Law? * Provincial and Federal jurisdictions Provincial jurisdiction is what each provincial government has power of (education, health case, social welfare, and highways) Laws that only affect people in the province. Federal jurisdiction is what the government of Canada has the power of (immigration, property proceedings, postal services, domestic transportation - Canadian railway system) Laws that affect everyone in the country * Difference between rules vs. laws The law is set and enforced by the government and the judicial system Rules are guidelines for appropriate behaviour - they only apply to participants in the game or members of the organisations that people participate in. Divisions of Law * Difference between public and private law Public law: deals with cases including the general public, including their safety. Murder, rape, arson etc. 3 types of public law: 1. Criminal law: murder assault, theft fraud 2. Constitutional law: the ability to use both English and French 3. Administrative law: building permits, workers compensation, farming regulation, interprovincial trade Private law: deals with more personal matters or matters within an organisation 5 types of private law: 1. Family law: divorce 2. Contract law: employee-employer contracts 3. Tort law: the ability to punish individuals who commit crimes - aims to compensate individuals who suffer harm from the act 4. Property law: the rights that individuals have over land, objects, and expression (example: no trespassing) 5. Labour law: governs collective bargaining and industrial relations among employers, their unionized employees and trade unions ( minimum wage etc.) Canadian Court System * The basic structure of the Canadian court system → How does a case get from the level one provincial/federal courts up to the Supreme Court of Canada? * Provincial court → appeals court → federal court → supreme court of Canada 1. Provincial: smaller offenses are tried 2. Federal, Tax court of Canada: provincial and territorial superior courts of general jurisdiction: more serious officers are tried in these courts. Most trials are jury trials 3. Federal courts of appeals and provincial courts of appeal to the supreme court 4. Supreme court: General court of appeal for Canada. Hears appeals from both Federal and Provincial * Supreme court judges: 9 judges all appointed by the governor-in-council. 3 judges must be from Quebec. Not all judges has to be there to hear the trials, just an uneven amount for the trail to commence The Development of Canadian Law * Magna Carta The rule of Law - rulers must obey the law. No one cannot take away the freedom of an individual without a valid reasoning and results without their consent/created as society believes that the law should be equal and that decisions should not be made without validity. No one is above the law * Common law Judges developed regular punishments for specific crimes * Rule of precedent Something has been done before can serve ls and example or rule for how things should be done * Feudal system Hierarchy wherein’ kings and lords are above the law * Habeas corpus Any person who was imprisoned without an explanation is entitled to appeal before the courts within a reasonable time * Wampum belts/Two Row Wampum Made in 1613 to represent the treaty between the Dutch and Haudenosaunee. Two rows of purple wampum beads on a white background. * White represents: peace, friendship and respect * 2 purple row represents: two paths or vessels traveling down the same river Limitations of Justice * Highway of Tears - highway located in Northern British Columbia. Many people (especially indigenous women) go missing while hitchhiking on his highway * Wrongful convictions * Eyewitness misidentification * False confessions * Misconducts from law enforcement or prosecutors * Inadequate legal representation * Forensic errors * Jailhouse informants * Systemic biases and prejudices ____________________________________________________________________________ Unit 2 Rights and Freedoms * What are rights and freedoms? What are the differences? * A right is a legal, moral or social entitlement that citizens can expect mainly from the government * Every citizen has the right to enter, remain in, and leave Canada if they are a Canadian citizen. * If a person is accused of committing a crime, they have a right to a fair trial * Every Canadian over the age of 18 has the right to vote * Freedom is the right to conduct one’s affairs without government interference * You have the right and freedom to seek out employment in Canada * You have the fundamental freedom of conscience and religion - freedom to believe in any religion in Canada * Freedom is liberty. It is the liberty to do something without constraint > ability to satisfy your own interests, needs, and desires * MY freedom should not come at the cost of YOUR freedom * 3 main rights outlined in class * Moral rights: based on moral principles, involve entitlements that people are bound to respect * Natural/Human rights; entitlements people have because they are human beings * Legal rights: based on legal principles and involve entitlements backed by the law * Who can vote and why? To be eligible for voting in a Canadian election, you must be a Canadian citizen over the age of 18 years old. Section 3 of the Charter rights: Democratic rights * Canadian Bill of Rights; what was it and what are its limitations? The Canadian bill of rights was the first attempt to codify the rights and freedoms across Canada. * It recognized the rights of individuals to life, liberty, personal security, and enjoyment of property * Freedom of religion, speech, assembly and association * Freedom of the press * The right to counsel and the right to a fair hearing * Limitations: it was an ordinary federal statute - could be amended or revoked. * It was not applicable to provincial and territorial governments * There was still a need to entrench rights and freedoms - this was done under the Canadian Charter of rights and freedoms. * The Ontario Human Rights Code; what is it and how is it different from the Federal one? Why was it needed? * The Ontario Human Rights Code: (OHRC) protects people from discrimination living in Ontario * Protects Ontarians from discrimination in areas such as: services, goods, facilities, occupancy of accommodations, contracts - written or oral, agreements, employment, membership of vocational associations and trade unions * There are prohibited grounds of discrimination, including trace, place of origin citizenship, sexual orientation, age, family status, and more Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution * What is the Charter? What is the Constitution? * The Charter sets out those rights and freedoms that all Canadians believe are necessary in a free and democratic society * The constitution is a set of laws containing the basic rules about how our country operates. * The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is apart of our constitution making it a constitutional law * What is the amending formula for the constitution/charter? The amending formula for the constitution/charter is the procedure to change the charter rights - it requires the agreement of ⅔ of the provinces and 50% of the population * This formula makes it very difficult to change the Charter * What does entrenched mean in regards to rights in the charter? * Entrenched in the charter means that our rights are safeguarded in the constitution and cannot be easily changed * Know what is in the following sections of the charter: 1 - 6, 15. Know the basics of these sections. 1. Reasonable limits clause * Rights and freedoms are not absolute (except democratic ones) * They can be limited if the limit is deemed reasonable and in a free democratic society * Sometimes rights and freedoms are limited in order to protect the rights and freedoms of others in society * Courts MUST deem a reasonable limit - they must also balance the rights of an individual against the rights of/protection of society 2. Fundamental freedoms 1. Freedom of conscience and religion 2. Freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression 3. Freedom of peaceful assembly 4. Freedom of association 3. Democratic rights 4. Democratic rights 5. Democratic rights * Example: right to vote if you’re Canadian citizen over the age of 18 6. Mobility right * Canadians can leave and remain in Canada if they wish. 15) Equality rights * This section guarantees that all peoples are treated equally under the law that protects them from discrimination 33) the Notwithstanding clause * In very rare cases federal or provincial government will use the NWS clause to pass a law that overrides certain rights and freedoms in the charter of rights and freedoms * These laws must be reviewed every 5 years * The NWS clause gives the federal and provincial governments the ability to override some of your charter rights * THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS NEVER USED THE NWS CLAUSE * Quebec was the first province to use it and has used it the most. * Provincial government workers (teachers, healthcare workers etc.) are not allowed to wear openly religious pieces (i.e: crosses, hijabs, star of david, etc) Oakes Test * What is it and how was it created? * The oaks test is a test that was created by the supreme court of Canada. Its objective is to determine when a limit on a right or freedom should be considered reasonable and therefore, allowable. * What are the 4 criteria of the Oakes Test? 1. Objective: do Canadians believe the law is important? 2. Rational connection: does the law work? Will having the law reduce this behavior? 3. Minimal impairment: does the law limit the right/freedom as little as possible, while still achieving the purpose of the law? 4. Proportionality: Does the good the law do outweigh the negative aspects of limiting a right or freedom? Equality Rights * What is equality and discrimination? * Equality: means giving every person equal respect in society, so that all people are treated fairly without discrimination * Discrimination: treating individuals, or groups unfairly based on characteristics such as race or gender. ____________________________________________________________________________ Unit 3 Criminal Law * What is criminal law and civil law? What do they deal with? * Criminal law deals with illegal acts committed against society. Someone charged with a crime against society is charged by the Crown (Regina/Rex) and tried in criminal court - if found guilty individual is punished by the Crown, but do not have to compensate the victim of the crime * Civil law deals with illegal acts committed against an individual. The appellant sues the respondent for compensation * 4 criteria for a crime 1. Must harm other people 2. Must violate society’s basic values 3. Dealing with it must not violate society’s basic values 4. The law can make a significant contribution to resolving the problem * General and specific intent * General intent: refers to the intention to perform a prohibited act without necessarily tending the specific outcome * Specific intent: involves a deliberate intention to commit a specific act or cause a specific outcome Elements of a Crime * Motive: a motive is something that pushes an individual to commit a crime * Attempt: an attempt is something that is done with the motive of achieving something, but failing at it * Conspiracy: planning out a crime Parties to an offence * Aideing, abetting, Accessory after the fact, Criminal organizations Criminal Code * What is it? What level of government? * The criminal code is a federal statute meant to reflect current social values of Canadians * It outlines clear and concise definitions of what a criminal offence is * Established a range of punishments the judge can impose when a person is convicted * Courts must interpret the facts based on the case before them * Homicide (see the chart on slide 8 of the “criminal code” slides. * Homicide is the killing of another person, directly, or indirectly * 3 Types of Culpable homicide * Culpable homicide is the cause of death of someone else, on purpose or recklessness. BLAMABLE CRIMINAL HOMOCIDE * 1) Murder: INTENTIONAL HOMOCIDE * 2) Manslaughter: causing the death of a person directly or indirectly * By means of unlawful act * Requires general intact * Sometimes people charged with murder are convicted of manslaughter as well * Accused successfully uses on one of two defences: Provocation or intoxication * 3) Infanticide: Killing a baby * 2 types of murder 1. First degree MOST SERIOUS FORM OF HOMOCIDE * Planned or deliberate * Victim is a law enforcement agent * Death occurs while another crime is being committed 2. Second degree - murder that DOES NOT MEET the conditions of first degree * 3 types of assault 1. Assault: apply intentional force to another person (punching, grabbing) * Attempting or threatening by act of gesture * Approaching or blocking the way of another person 2. Assault causing bodily harm: physical attack with a weapon, such as knife of bat * Usually causes bodily harm which requires medical attention * Interferes with the victims medical health * Carries a maximum penalty of 10 years 3. Aggravated assault: MOST SEVERE. Injuries may threaten the life of victim * Committed if person wounds, maims, disfigures, or endangers the life of victim * Carries a maximum sentence of 14 years All assaults have two common elements: * Accused must have intent to carry out attack and cause harm * Must be NO consent from the victim ____________________________________________________________________________ Everything listed below will have a short or long answer question about it. * Motive: The reason someone commits a crime. It is not the same as mens rea, however, evidence of a motive may be used by the Crown to help prove mens rea. The Crown does not have to prove motive, however, can be useful evidence for mens rea * Mens Rea Means Rea refers to being mentally guilty - guilty mind. I.e purposefully robbing a band. “the act will not make a person guilty unless the mind is also guilty” * Mens Rea can come in many forms * Direct intent: when someone commits a crime on purpose/deliberately. The person has a specific purpose and intended outcome (hurting someone, to take their possessions) * Criminal state of mind: when a person has the intent to commit a crime, they are considered to be in a criminal state of mind. * Willful blindness: pretending not to see something, but rather choosing not to know the obvious * This is not looking the other way when a crime is being committed, rather ignoring certain facts or information about a situation that would lead to a reasonable person to know that a crime is being committed * Recklessness: acting out carelessly without regards for the consequences - no direct intent for the outcome, you simply just do not care * Knowing the risk but not caring * Criminal negligence: the extreme and reckless disregard for the lives and safety of other people. * Failed to recognize the risk posed by your action when you should have. * Actus Reus Actus Reus refers to deliberately physically carrying out an offence. This could be assault, murder, robbery etc. * Summary Conviction offences * Minor criminal offences * People accused of these can be summoned to court without delay * Maximum penalty under criminal code = $2000 and/or 6 months in jail * Indictable offences * Serious crimes that carry more severe penalities * Criminal code sets maximum penalty for each offence - 25 years (life in prison) for some offences * Some offences have maximum penalty (i.e $600 to 5 years for impaired driving) * Trial judge decides the penalty * Advantages of trial by jury * People from diverse backgrounds make the decision in a case * They make their decision based on current social values rather than legal precedent alone * Their decision must be unanimous, so the defence only needs to convince on juror that reasonable doubt exists * They may be more easily influenced by a dramatic lawyer than a judge alone, who hears it all of the time * Advantages of trial by judge alone * Judges are typically more impartial than juries * Some jurors may allow their disgust for a case cloud their judgment on an issue * A judge won’t usually be swayed by a good speech * A judge must provide reasons for her/his decision, a jury doesn’t * Two Row Wampum A representation of a treaty between the dutch and hudanosaunee. White background and two purple stripes. The white represents peach unity and respect between both groups, and the purple represents two paths. Short answer: What is mens rea * Mens rea refers to being the guilty mind. There are 5 types of mens rea 1. Criminal state of mind: when committing a crime an individual is in a criminal state of mind. 2. Direct intent: forming a plan to commit a crime 3. Willful blindness: deliberately ignoring a crime going in front of you and failing to report such crime to correct authorities 4. Criminal negligence: failing to recognise the risk posed by an action when you should have 5. Recklessness: knowing you should’t do something but still doing it. What is actus rea * Actus rea is physically carrying out the crime What is an indictable offence * An indictable offence is the most serious crime that carries out more severe punishment - life in prison (25 years) being one of them. Some offences have a maximum penalty of 5 years and $600. - trial judges determine the penalties What is a summary conviction * A summary conviction is less severe than an indictable offence, people convicted of summary conviction can be summoned to court without delay. Maximum punishment is 6 months in jail and $2000 Long answer: Whats a wampum belt * The wampum belt was essentially a treaty/peace belt made between the Hudanasaunee confederacy and the Dutch settlers. It is a white and purple beaded belt. With a white background signifying peace, unity, and respect and two purple parallel lines representing two vessels on different paths. Would you rather have a trial by judge or jury * God forbid I ever commit a crime as that would give my parents a heart attack, however in a theoretical situation that I did and I had to prove myself in a court case, I would rather have a trial by a jury. I would rather have a trial by jury because there’s a more diverse group of people therefore different lenses to my defence. If I were to ever end up in court I would obviously hire the best lawyer I know who WILL sway the jury to my side (the defendant)