Ethics
Defence ethics
Groia v LSUC, 2018 SCC 27
Criminal defence lawyers are the final frontier between the accused and the power of the state. Fearless and resolute defence advocacy extends beyond ethical obligation and into the realm of constitutional imperative.
Smith v Jones, [1999] 1 SCR 455
A defence lawyer is never required to breach solicitor client privilege. They have a discretion to breach this privilege only where they believe there is imminent threat of serious harm or death to an identifiable person or group of persons.
R v Barros, 2011 SCC 51
Defence counsel is entitled to investigate the identity of confidential informants to further their client’s right to make full answer and defence.
R v Neil, 2002 SCC 70
A lawyer may not represent one client whose interests are adverse to another client’s, unless both clients consent after receiving full disclosure, and preferably independent legal advice.
R v Short, 2018 ONCA 1
Judges should rely on the submissions on defence counsel for the evidentiary foundation for the decision on whether to remove them from the record.
R v Cunningham, 2010 scc 10
Defence counsel is entitled to be removed from the record when they have not been paid, provided that they give enough notice so that the client may retain other counsel.
Crown ethics
R v Ahluwalia (2000), 149 CCC (3d) 193 (Ont CA)
“The Crown has obligations to the administration of justice that do not burden other litigants.” When it has reason to believe its own witness has committed perjury, the Crown has a positive obligation to take all reasonable steps to find out what happened and to share the results of that investigation with the defence.
R v Lyttle, 2004 scc 5
Questions put to witnesses in cross-examination need not have an evidentiary foundation, but they must have a good faith basis.
R v HA, 2013 ONSC 5242
Crown submissions must also be grounded in good faith. A Crown allegation that defence witnesses concocted their evidence should not be made for the first time in closing submissions.
Krieger v LSA, 2002 SCC 65
Crown discretion is constitutionally protected. Its exercise is only reviewable by the courts where it amounts to an abuse of process.
R v Nixon, 2011 SCC 34
Where the Crown repudiates a plea agreement, they bear the onus of explaining why. Failure to provide that explanation may persuade a court that an abuse of process has occurred.
R v Delchev, 2015 ONCA 381
A resolution offer made directly to the accused may undermine their relationship with defence counsel and amount to an abuse of process.