enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. R v Mohan - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Mohan

    Her Majesty The Queen v Chikmaglur Mohan: Citations [1994] 2 SCR 9: Ruling: appeal was allowed and the evidence was excluded. Court membership; Chief Justice: Antonio Lamer Puisne Justices: Gérard La Forest, Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, John Sopinka, Charles Gonthier, Peter Cory, Beverley McLachlin, Frank Iacobucci, John C. Major: Reasons given ...

  3. Intention (criminal law) - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intention_(criminal_law)

    Intent is defined in English law by the ruling in R v Mohan [1976] QB 1 as "the decision to bring about a prohibited consequence" (malum prohibitum). [1] [2] [3] A range of words represents shades of intent in criminal laws around the world. The mental element, or mens rea, of murder, for example, was historically called malice aforethought.

  4. Template:Clist mens rea - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Clist_mens_rea

    Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Pages for logged out editors learn more

  5. Reasons of the Supreme Court of Canada by Justice Sopinka

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasons_of_the_Supreme...

    R v Mohan, [1994] 2 SCR 9 (Concurrence) R v Daviault [1994] 3 SCR 6 (Dissent) R v Burlingham, [1995] 2 SCR 206 (Concurrence) Egan v Canada, [1995] 2 SCR 513 (Concurrence) R v Park, [1995] 2 SCR 836 (Concurrence) R v Jorgensen, [1995] 4 SCR 55 (Majority) Adler v Ontario (AG), [1996] 3 SCR 609 (Concurrence) R v Badger, [1996] 1 SCR 771 ...

  6. Category:Canadian evidence case law - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Canadian_evidence...

    Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Help; Learn to edit; Community portal; Recent changes; Upload file

  7. Talk:R v Mohan - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:R_v_Mohan

    Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Donate; Pages for logged out editors learn more

  8. R v R - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_R

    R v R [1991] UKHL 12 is a House of Lords judgement in which R was convicted of attempting to rape his wife but appealed his conviction on the grounds of a marital rape exemption whereby R claimed a husband cannot be convicted of raping his wife as his wife had given consent to sexual intercourse through the contract of marriage which she could not withdraw.

  9. R v Woollin - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Woollin

    In R v Matthews and Alleyne, [4] the Court of Appeal concluded that the Woollin test was an evidential rather than substantial rule of law: judges ought to instruct jurors that they may interpret what they would see as certain knowledge on the defendant's part of the virtually certain consequence of death as evidence of intention, but Woollin ...