Product Details
978-0-7798-8519-0
Book S.O. Annual/biannual/biennial
Includes 1 case law and 1 legislation supplement, 1-2 additional case law supplements per year. Invoiced separately. Annual volumes supplied on standing order subscription.
Approximately 2920 pages
1 volume bound + Legislative supplement
hardcover
2018-08-14
Carswell

Can We Help?

If you need assistance, please call us at (416) 609-3800 (Toronto & international) / 1-800-387-5164 (toll free Canada & US).

We will be glad to assist you.

The 2019 Annotated Tremeear's Criminal Code
Availability: In Stock
$146.00
Description

Authoritative commentary, case summaries of appellate court decisions, and cross-references to related provisions help you understand how the parts of the Criminal Code interact

30th Anniversary Edition

Get quick access to the important cases – so you can present your arguments with confidence. Authoritative commentary, case summaries of appellate court decisions, and cross-references to related provisions help you understand how the parts of the Criminal Code interact.

Throughout its history, defence, Crown and the judiciary have all come to trust and rely upon the indispensable annotations and commentary by the Tremeear's authors in this acclaimed courtroom resource.

The Annotated Tremeear's Criminal Code:

  • Features thousands of Supreme Court of Canada and provincial appellate Court decisions
  • Cross-references the appropriate specimen jury instructions (Watt's Manual of Criminal Jury Instructions)
  • Includes Offence Tables that allow you to classify an offence, determine maximum and minimum sentences and the range of sentencing options and orders, forms of charges, and table of concordance

New in this edition

The 2019 Edition of The Annotated Tremeear’s Criminal Code:

Features all the latest legislative amendments, including the following:

  • An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code, S.C. 2017, c. 13, amended the Criminal Code definition of “identifiable group” in s. 318(4) and also amended the principles that a court shall take into consideration on sentencing in s. 718.2(a) to include evidence that the offence was motivated by bias, prejudice or hate based on gender identity or expression.
  • The Journalistic Sources Protection Act, S.C. 2017, c. 22, amended the Criminal Code and the Canada Evidence Act to protect the confidentiality of journalistic sources and to create additional requirements for the issuance of a search warrant relating to a journalist.
  • An Act to amend the Criminal Code (mischief), S.C. 2017, c. 23, amends the Criminal Code offence of mischief in relation to religious property.

As well, the Schedules to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act have undergone amendment introduced by the following: SOR/2017-249; SOR/2017-275; SOR/2017-277.

Incorporates such key cases as:

SCC Cases

  • R. v. Jones, 2017 SCC – Even where D has a reasonable expectation of privacy in text messages, no breach of s. 8 occurs when police lawfully obtain records of the messages stored on a service provider’s infrastructure under a production order.
  • R. v. Seipp, 2018 SCC – Evidence that D fled the scene of a motor vehicle accident to avoid liability for possession of a stolen motor vehicle is evidence of an “intent to escape civil or criminal liability” within s. 252(1).
  • R. v. Boutilier, 2017 SCC – Before designating D a dangerous offender, the judge must be satisfied on the evidence that D poses a high likelihood of harmful recidivism and that D’s conduct is intractable.
  • R. v. Marakah, 2017 SCC – To determine whether a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in the subject-matter of the search requires a consideration of the totality of the circumstances. Section 8 applies where a person has a reasonable privacy interest in the object or subject-matter of the state action and the information to which it gives access.

Court of Appeal Cases                                                 

  • R. v. A.R.D., 2017 ABCA – In a prosecution alleging sexual offences, the absence of avoidant behavior or a change in behavior on the part of V is logically irrelevant, thus cannot form the basis of a credibility assessment leading to a reasonable doubt about D’s guilt.
  • Primeau c. R., 2017 QCCA – Accident is a defence to the element of intention in murder or to any other offence in which a culpable mental state is an essential element. An accident that occurs in the absence of any other unlawful act precludes any criminal liability.
  • R. v. Allen, 2017 MBCA – To constitute an alibi, the evidence must be determinative of the final issue of D’s guilt or innocence by excluding any “window of opportunity” for D to possibly have committed the offence. Evidence that D had only a limited opportunity to commit an offence is not an alibi.
  • R. v. Spence, 2017 ONCA – Where NCRMD is advanced, a jury should be instructed that, if they reject this denial of criminal responsibility, they must consider the whole of the evidence, including the evidence of D’s mental illness, in determining whether P has proven the fault element in murder beyond a reasonable doubt.
  • R. v. E.J.B., 2017 ABCA – In general, a person regarded by the parent or guardian of a child, and/or the child, to be a responsible person, relied upon to do the right thing vis-à-vis the child, is in a position of trust.
  • R. v. Lotfy, 2017 BCCA – For a warrantless arrest under s. 495(1)(b), P must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that the arresting officer had reasonable grounds to believe the arrested person was committing a criminal offence in the officer’s presence.
  • R. v. Vice Media Canada Inc., 2017 ONCA – On a motion to quash or revoke a production order, the media is entitled to put further material before the reviewing judge for consideration in determining whether the order should have issued.

ProView eBook version is available through your web browser, or can be downloaded to your computer, tablet, or smartphone. See all available titles at store.thomsonreuters.ca/ebook

 

About the Author
The Honourable Mr. Justice David Watt is a Judge of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. He was a Judge for the Superior Court of Justice for 22 years and was Crown Counsel in Ontario for 13 years, including eight years as Senior Crown Counsel (Criminal Law), Ministry of the Attorney General. Mr. Justice Watt is a well-known lecturer and has taught criminal law, evidence and procedure to law students, practitioners and judges at several Canadian law schools and in Continuing Legal Education programs across Canada for over 30 years. He is the Honourary Chair of the National Criminal Law Program.

The Honourable Madam Justice Michelle Fuerst has been a judge of the Superior Court of Justice for Ontario since 2002. She presides primarily over criminal law cases. Prior to her appointment as a judge, she was a partner with the Toronto firm of Gold & Fuerst, exclusively practising criminal and quasi-criminal litigation. She is a co-author of The Annotated Tremeear’s Criminal Code, a former co-Chair of the Federation of Law Societies’ National Criminal Law Program, and a former part-time instructor at Osgoode Hall Law School.