LEGISLATION AND COURT DECISIONS AFFECTING THE BRITISH COLUMBIA REVIEW BOARD
Criminal Code
Youth Criminal
Justice Act
The following is a partial list of some of the Court decisions that interpret
Part XX.1 of the Criminal Code:
Significant Risk:
R.
v. Winko, [1999] 2 S.C.R. 625, 135 C.C.C. (3rd) 129, 25 C.R. (5th)
1
Significant Risk - Standard of Review:
R.
v. Owen, [2003]
Test for Fitness:
R. v. Taylor (1992), 77 C.C.C. (3d)
551, 17 C.R. (4th) 371, 11 O.R. 323 (C.A.)
Excluding Members of the Public from a Hearing:
Blackman v. British Columbia (Review Board) (1995), 95 C.C.C.
(3d) 412, 88 W.A.C. 170, 27 C.R.R. (2d) 106 (B.C.C.A.)
Applying WINKO - Dispositions by a Court or Review Board:
R.
v. Campagna (September 1, 1999), S.C.B.C.
R.
v. Campagna (September 3, 1999), S.C.B.C.
Least Restrictive Disposition:
Pinet v. Ontario (1995), 100 C.C.C.
(3d) 343, 40 C.R. (4th) 113, 23 O.R. (3rd) 97 (C.A.)
"Mental Condition" of Accused:
Peckham v. Ontario (Attorney General)
(1994), 93 C.C.C. (3d) 343, 34 C.R. (4th) 227, 19 O.R. (3d) 766 (C.A.)
Loss of Jurisdiction for Failing to Meet Statutory Timelines
Martin
v. British Columbia (Director of Adult Forensic Services), [2000]
B.C.C.A. 341
Consent to Treatment:
Starson
v. Swayze, [2003]