R v O.N.E.
| R v O.N.E. | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Hearing: 2001: June 18; Judgment: 2001: November 15. | |
| Full case name | Vancouver Sun v. Her Majesty The Queen, O.N.E. and the Attorney General of Canada |
| Citations | [2001] SCC 77, [2001] 3 SCR 478 |
| Docket No. | 28190 |
| Prior history | APPEAL from SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA |
| Ruling | Appeal allowed |
| Court Membership | |
| Reasons given | |
| Unanimous reasons by | Yes |
| Majority | Iacobucci J. |
Iacobucci J. wrote for a unanimous Court that the appeal raised substantially similar issues to those considered by the Court in R v Mentuck. He concluded that the publication ban sought should not have been ordered by the trial judge in light of the appropriate common law test for a publication ban. The appeal was therefore allowed. The publication ban, which was varied by the Court, was declared effective for a period of one year following the release of this judgment, because by that time, the operations in which the police officers were then involved should be completed.[1]
References
This article is issued from
Wikipedia.
The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike.
Additional terms may apply for the media files.