Canadian Rules of Evidence

Paper Summary:

This paper explores the issue of whether or not the rules of evidence in Canada discriminate against defendants or, conversely, work in their favor. After examining a representative sampling of the available legal record, the writer concludes that - in both civil as well as criminal law - every effort is undertaken to protect defendants from evidence being admitted that might unjustly prejudice them in the eyes of a judge or, more likely, the eyes of a jury. Along the way, the paper looks at how judges have grappled with the challenges posed by new information-collecting technologies as they pertain to the issue of what is, and what is not, an appropriate document as well as what the legal concepts "trustworthiness" and "Best Evidence Rule" really mean - and what their implications are for defendants. From there, the paper proceeds to enter into a discussion of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and how it protects defendant prerogatives.

From the Paper:

"Generally speaking, the admissibility of documents in Canadian courts is more open to interpretation than ever before; for example, by the 1990s there was a growing trend towards trial judges exercising discretionary power with regards to what documents should be ruled admissible in courts and which ones should not be admissible. What should not be overlooked in all of this is that justices are making these determinations at a time when technology is changing the way in which technology is stored dramatically."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Fern Philips, "Case Law and the Evidence Acts in Canada," ARMA Records Management Quarterly (April, 1995), at: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3691/is_199504/ai_n8714987/pg_1> (accessed: December 16, 2006).
• Prism Hospital Software Inc. v. Hospital Medical Records Institute [1992] 2 W.W.R.157 (B.C.S.C.)
• Haughian v. Paine ante R. v. Madsen. (1980) 2 Man. R. (2d) 420 at 425
• Part III, section 22(2) of the Canada Evidence Act, 1982 (n.d.) at: http://www.ulcc.ca/en/us/index.cfm?sec=1&sub=1e2#General%20Rule> (accessed: December 16, 2006).
• R. v. Sheppard (1992) 97 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. and 309 A.P.R.144 (Nfld S.C.)

More papers on Canadian Rules of Evidence:

• Research Paper # 131366 : "Rules of Evidence and Defendants"
• Case Study # 101337 : "Canadian Divorce Law"
• Argumentative Essay # 135843 : "Chaoulli v. Quebec"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: