Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
R v Mann is a 2004 decision of the Supreme Court of Canada.. The court held that although there is no general power of detention for investigative purposes, police officers may detain an individual if there are reasonable grounds to suspect in all the circumstances that the individual is connected to a particular crime and that the detention is reasonably necessary on an objective view of the ...
The Canadian system of police powers on reasonable and probable grounds is more clearly defined; a tip from an informer reporting a crime is insufficient to establish reasonable and probable grounds. [36] In Australia it depends on the circumstances of the case, rather than on the reasonable and probable grounds itself. [4]
Canada's laws regarding self-defense are similar in nature to those of England, as they centre around the acts committed, and whether or not those acts are considered reasonable in the circumstances. Generally where retreat is available in the circumstances, the decision to stand your ground is more likely to be unreasonable.
R v Storrey [1990] 1 S.C.R. 241 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the authority of police officers to make arrests. In addition to an officer's subjective belief that there are reasonable and probable grounds for arrest, the Court stipulated the grounds must be objectively justifiable.
In the law, the totality of the circumstances test refers to a method of analysis where decisions are based on all available information rather than bright-line rules. [1] Under the totality of the circumstances test, courts focus "on all the circumstances of a particular case, rather than any one factor". [ 2 ]
The UK courts have also ruled that an opinion formed by an employer or other contracting body in relation to a contractual matter has to be "reasonable" in the sense in which that expression is used in Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: see the decision of the High Court in The Vainqueur José [4] and that of the ...
Brinegar v. United States, 338 U.S. 160 (1949), was a United States Supreme Court case employing the "reasonableness test" in warrantless searches.The Court held that while the police need not always be factually correct in conducting a warrantless search, such a search must always be reasonable.
The reasonable suspicion test is usually considered to be of a less stringent standard as compared to the real likelihood of bias test. The reasonable suspicion test is also thought to be applied from the perspective of the public (or in the eyes of a reasonable man), while the real likelihood of bias test is applied from the court's perspective.