Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Criminal law - Trial - Jury instructions - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial judge should have departed from the model jury instructions in instructing the jury on reasonable doubt.

The complainant and the accused both attended a house party in August 2004. The complainant testified to the effect that, after passing out in a nearby park, she woke up to the accused having sexual intercourse with her. The accused admitted speaking to the complainant in the park and trying to help her, but denied sexual contact.

The trial judge, in her charge, stated that the real issue was whether or not the events occurred at all and whether the Respondent was the person involved. While other witnesses were called, the credibility of the complainant and the accused was the central issue for the jury in deciding whether the Crown had proved the offence beyond a reasonable doubt. After deliberating one day, the jury asked the judge to clarify the reasonable doubt section of the charge. After conferring with counsel, the trial judge answered the question by repeating to the jury the instruction on reasonable doubt contained in her charge. The jury returned with its verdict of guilty within an hour or so. On appeal, the majority of the Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction and ordered a new trial. Monnin J.A., dissenting, would have dismissed the appeal on the basis that he was not convinced that the manner in which the trial judge had proceeded was in error