What is the current common law common law requirement for caution the jury on the dangers of convicting on the uncorroborated evidence of the complainant?
British Columbia, Canada
The following excerpt is from R. v. V. K., 1991 CanLII 5761 (BC CA):
Prior to April 1, 1955, in the case of certain sexual offences, the common law required a trial judge to caution the jury on the dangers of convicting on the uncorroborated evidence of the complainant. This requirement was described as a rule of practice: see Thomas v. The Queen (1952), 1952 CanLII 7 (SCC), 103 C.C.C. 193 at p. 199, [1952] 4 D.L.R. 306, [1952] 2 S.C.R. 344, per Cartwright J. When s. 134 (later to become s. 142) of the new Criminal Code came into effect, the requirement for such a caution became a rule of law in the case of certain sexual offences including rape and indecent assault on a female.
"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.
Other Questions
What is the standard of care required by common law by the common law under common law? (British Columbia, Canada)
In a discrimination case where a complainant names as a respondent a lawyer who acted for another lawyer in the course of a discriminatory event, is the complainant required to waive solicitor-client privilege? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is limited common property a common common expense of a strata corporation? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the effect of a common law common law agreement where the parties have reached an agreement stating that if the parties reconcile, will the common law rule remain in effect even if they reconcile? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the impact of the evidence of the complainant's defence against the Complainant on the allegation of sexual assault? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the common law common law obligation of a landowner at common law to do anything with regard to a natural watercourse? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the current state of the law in Canada when it comes to rationalizing the subjective evidence of the parties' intentions with objective evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does common sense apply to determine whether care is required even in the absence of medical evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a plaintiff required to lead expert evidence to overcome a no evidence motion? (British Columbia, Canada)
Does a no evidence motion where a real estate agent defendant argued that there was no expert evidence sufficient to establish a standard of care? (British Columbia, Canada)
