The Curative Proviso : When Being Wrong Doesn't Matter
Section 686(1)(b)(iii) (the “curative proviso”) of the Criminal Code permits an appellate court to uphold a conviction despite error of law committed by the trial judge where that error has not led to a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice. The “ curative proviso ” is to be applied only in those cases where the outcome of the trial, irrespective of the error, would necessarily have been the same. Colpitts v. The Queen , 1965 CanLII 2 (SCC), [1965] S.C.R. 739 ). The onus of establishing that this high standard is met is on the Crown. R. v. Jolivet , 2000 SCC 29 (CanLII), [2000] 1 S.C.R. 751 ; R. v. Khan , 2001 SCC 86 (CanLII), [2001] 3 S.C.R. 823 ; R. v. Van , 2009 SCC 22 (CanLII), [2009] 1 S.C.R. 716 . The curative proviso may be applied, according to its modern interpretation, where the Crown can establish on a balance of probabilities that the legal error is harmless, in the sense that no prejudice has resulted, or that, despite any preju...
Comments
Post a Comment