As part of its mandate, CDAS has intervened in criminal and quasi-criminal cases to provide a unique perspective to Canadian Courts.

Please see our recent interventions below.

October 18, 2018

R. v. Barton - SCC Intervention

On October 11, 2018, Daniel Song and Matthew Nathanson intervened on behalf of CDAS in R. v. Barton at the Supreme Court of Canada. This case examines crucial aspects of the law and procedure in sexual assault cases. CDAS argued that the Crown should not be able to appeal an acquittal based on an argument not presented at trial. Further, when the Crown's deliberate position at trial contributes to a legal error in a jury charge, the principle against double jeopardy ought to preclude the Crown from appealing on a different theory of liability to establish that error.

To read a copy of CDAS's factum, click here.

To view Daniel Song's submissions, click here (beginning at 1:12:50).

August 03, 2018

CDAS was recently granted leave to intervene at the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Barton, an appeal of the Alberta Court of Appeal's reversal of a jury acquittal. This appeal raises myriad legal issues. CDAS lawyers, Daniel Song and Matthew Nathanson, will argue about whether the Crown, on its own appeal, can materially change its factual or legal theory of liability.

June 07, 2018

Groia v. LSUC - Professional Ethics

CDAS intervened at the Supreme Court of Canada in Groia v. Law Society of Upper Canada, a case considering the limits of a lawyer's ability to zealously advocate for their clients.

This decision enshrines the principle that the standards of civility cannot compromise a lawyer's duty for resolute advocacy. During a heated trial, Mr. Groia, the lawyer for a man accused of insider trading, had alleged misconduct against the prosecutors with the Ontario Securities Commission. Mr. Groia had an honest but mistaken belief of the prosecutors' professional obligations. His client was acquitted, but the Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) launched a professional misconduct allegation. The LSUC found him guilty of professional misconduct. The SCC held that the LSUC's finding of professional misconduct was unreasonable. Mr. Groia's actions, based on a sincerely held, but mistaken belief, did not amount to uncivil conduct, particularly since he adjusted his behaviour once the trial judge expressed concerns.

Click here  for a copy of CDAS's factum to the SCC.

Click here to read the final judgment.

June 07, 2018

BCCLA v. Canada - Solitary Confiement

CDAS intervened at the BC Supreme Court in BCCLA v. Canada (AG), a case challenging the constitutionality of indeterminate solitary confinement .CDAS specifically challenged the lack of access to counsel during the segregation review process. Justice Leask accepted CDAS's submissions and found the current solitary confinement legislation unconstitutional, as it violates sections 7 and 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.​

Click here for a copy of the final decision.

Click here for a copy of the CDAS factum.

June 07, 2018

R. v. Brassington - Solicitor-Client Privilege

CDAS intervened with written submissions to the Supreme Court of Canada in this case. The SCC has reserved its judgment in this case, which examined the interplay between the solicitor-client privilege and informer privilege.

A copy of the CDAS factum will be available shortly.

Please reload

Criminal Defence Advocacy Society

© 2015 by CDAS