The panel dismissed the fresh evidence motion at the hearing because the appellant failed to satisfy the four well-known criteria for the admission of fresh evidence. See Palmer v. The Queen, 1979 CanLII 8 (SCC), [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759. In particular, he did not establish that the evidence was not available at the time of the hearing of the application (the due diligence criteria). As well, he failed to address the requirement that the proposed evidence was reasonably capable of belief. Conclusion
"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.