kyla lee

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation examines a case involving the defence of colour-of-right and its potential application in protest-related contempt proceedings. Colour-of-right is typically raised where someone believes they are entitled to property and acts on that belief. In this case, individuals involved in anti-deforestation protests in British Columbia were subject to court injunctions restricting their activities. Some protesters violated those orders and were charged with contempt of court, arguing that their actions were justified because they believed they were protecting land they had a rightful claim to. The courts rejected that argument, raising important questions about the limits of this defence.

Colour-Of-Right: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation examines a case involving delay in criminal trials and whether time taken by judges to decide mid-trial issues should count toward the Jordan ceiling. In a Quebec case, the accused argued that his right to be tried within a reasonable time was breached because the judge took time throughout the trial to rule on interlocutory motions and Charter applications. These pauses extended the proceedings beyond the 18 month ceiling. The Quebec Court of Appeal disagreed, finding that this type of delay did not violate the accused’s rights.

Deliberate Delay: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »

Welcome to “Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!”

In this episode, Kyla Lee from Acumen Law Corporation examines a case involving jury instructions and the role of addressing myths and stereotypes in criminal trials. A First Nations man, Necan, was charged with an offence allegedly committed after consuming alcohol. The defence requested a specific jury instruction addressing harmful stereotypes about Indigenous people and alcohol use, including the “firewater” myth. The trial judge declined to give that tailored instruction, instead relying on general guidance about avoiding bias. Necan was convicted, and the issue raised important questions about whether generic instructions are enough to guard against prejudice in cases involving historically marginalized groups.

Myths & Jury Instructions: Cases That Should Have Gone to the Supreme Court of Canada, But Didn’t!Read More »