Q v Phillips

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    The trial judge in this case found that the violations of section 10(b) were sufficient to justify the exclusion of the evidence. On the other hand, the section 9 violation was not found to be serious. Indeed, it is not until the exclusion analysis that the decision explicitly acknowledges that there was an arbitrary detention at all: the focus of the discussion surrounding section 9 concerned the ways in which the detention was lawful. It is worth teasing out a bit, because it is a situation that arises frequently, and around which there is plenty of room for debate.

    Original languageCanadian English
    JournalArticles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
    Publication statusPublished - Jan. 1 2021

    Keywords

    • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
    • Arbitrary Detention or Imprisonment
    • Arrest or Detention
    • Right to Be Informed of Reasons
    • Right to Counsel
    • Right to Be Informed
    • Unreasonable Search and Seizure
    • Charter Remedies
    • Exclusion of Evidence
    • Section 9
    • Section 10
    • Section 8
    • Section 24

    Disciplines

    • Constitutional Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Criminal Procedure
    • Law

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Q v Phillips'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this