The Appellant says that his counsel was incompetent because he did not arrange to tender expert evidence from a toxicologist, which, he says, taken together with his evidence would constitute a valid defence and accordingly he seeks to tender expert evidence of evidence to the contrary, as fresh evidence in order to substantiate his allegation that his trial counsel was incompetent and relies on the criteria set out in Palmer v. The Queen (1979) 1979 CanLII 8 (SCC), 50 C.C.C. (2d) 193 (S.C.C.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.