Case information

Criminal law – Sexual offences – Evidence – Credibility – Principle in Browne v. Dunn – Trial fairness – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in failing to intervene, despite finding that the principle in Browne v. Dunn (1893), 6 R. 67, had not been breached, contrary to the trial judge’s ruling – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in finding that since the applicant had not been prevented from presenting his evidence at trial, he suffered no prejudice at all, despite the adverse credibility finding made against him – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in finding no breach of trial fairness even though the trial judge had not discussed the breach and its possible remedies with the parties.

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)

The Court of Quebec made twelve findings of guilt against the applicant for multiple sexual offences committed against his adoptive daughters while they were young girls. At trial, the complainants testified for the prosecution. The defence was total denial. The applicant testified, as did his spouse and several sons. Credibility was the key issue at trial and the resolution of the case was governed by the principles in R. v. W.(D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742.

The applicant appealed his convictions on two grounds. First, he claimed that in the application of the principles in W.(D.), the trial judge attributed too much weight to the demeanour of the complainants when they testified. Second, he claimed that the judge erred in his application of the principle in Browne v. Dunn, (1893), 6 R. 67. The Court of Appeal of Quebec unanimously dismissed the appeal.