R v Khill and the Structure of Self-Defence: Declining to See What Isn't There

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    The disagreement in R v Khill between Justices Martin and Moldaver over how to approach section 34 is entirely understandable. The genesis of their debate is that they are aiming at different things. Justice Martin is trying to put into effect the scheme that Parliament intended: Justice Moldaver is trying to create a law around defence of the person which is well-structured and allows for appellate review. In an ideal world those would be the same thing, but when it comes to the defence in section 34, we are not in an ideal world.

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

    Keywords

    • Defences
    • Self-Defence
    • Defence of Another
    • Act Committed Reasonable in Circumstances
    • Section 34

    Disciplines

    • Criminal Law
    • Criminal Procedure
    • Law

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'R v Khill and the Structure of Self-Defence: Declining to See What Isn't There'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this