Case information

Criminal law — Murder — Elements of offence — Constructive first degree murder —Confinement — Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to address the applicants’ primary arguments on appeal which concerned planning and deliberation for first degree murder under s. 231(2) of the Criminal Code — Whether the Court of Appeal erroneously conflates the capacity to form intent with the fact of intent for murder — Whether the Court of Appeal erred in their analysis under s. 231(5) of the Criminal Code in reinterpreting the R. v. Harbottle, [1993] 3 S.C.R. 306 test for unlawful confinement — Whether the Court of Appeal erred in characterizing the standard of review with respect to s. 231(5) of the Criminal Code.l?

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.

(PUBLICATION BAN IN CASE) (SEALING ORDER) (COURT FILE CONTAINS INFORMATION THAT IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION BY THE PUBLIC)


The applicants were convicted of first degree murder for the death of their child who died of bacterial sepsis resulting from neglect and starvation. The child was deprived of insulin and medical care. There was ample medical evidence before the trial judge about the relationship between the child’s Type 1 diabetes and the cause of death. The trial judge found that the facts supported the necessary inferences for a conviction for first degree murder as a planned and deliberate murder (s. 231(2) of the Criminal Code) or as a murder committed during an unlawful confinement (s. 231(5)(e) of the Criminal Code). The Court of Appeal dismissed the conviction appeals.