R v Beaulac

Edit links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
R v Beaulac
Court of Appeal for British Columbia.
RulingAppeal allowed.
Holding
Language rights in the Constitution of Canada and section 530 of the Criminal Code are to be given a purposive and liberal interpretation.
Court membership
Chief Justice: Antonio Lamer
Puisne Justices: Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, Charles Gonthier, Peter Cory, Beverley McLachlin, Frank Iacobucci, John C. Major, Michel Bastarache, Ian Binnie
Reasons given
MajorityBastarache J., joined by L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin, Iacobucci, and Major JJ.
ConcurrenceLamer C.J. and Binnie J.

R v Beaulac [1999] 1 S.C.R. 768 is a decision by the

Société des Acadiens v. Association of Parents (1986). As the majority wrote, "To the extent that Société des Acadiens du Nouveau-Brunswick... stands for a restrictive interpretation of language rights, it is to be rejected."[2]

Background

Jean Victor Beaulac was accused of murder and was brought before the

British Columbia Supreme Court and convicted. Beaulac claimed rights under section 530 of the Criminal Code, which allows for the accused to be heard in court in his or her language, if it is one of the official languages of Canada, English or French. The Supreme Court noted in its 1999 decision that this was the first time it had ever considered this Criminal Code right.[3]
At a lower level, Beaulac had been denied this right to be heard in French, since one judge found Beaulac's skills in English were adequate though not perfect.

Decision

The majority of the Court first considered the

section 16 of the Canadian Charter
.

Turning to section 530 of the Criminal Code, the Court called it an "absolute right." Since past interpretation indicated such rights are not just due process, it should be respected beyond what the letter of the law actually demands.[5] The Court also found that the accused's language was a personal matter and related to one's identity, and therefore courts should respect the accused's "subjective" feelings towards a language. In this case, the Court ordered a new trial.

Concurrence

Chief Justice Antonio Lamer and Ian Binnie wrote a brief concurrence on section 530 of the Criminal Code. However, they protested the reconsideration of Société des Acadiens and section 16 of the Charter since the Beaulac case did not involve constitutional law. "It is a well-established rule of prudence that courts ought not to pronounce on constitutional issues unless they are squarely raised for decision," they wrote.[6]

References

  1. ^ SCC Case Information - Docket 26416 Supreme Court of Canada
  2. ^ Para. 25.
  3. ^ Para. 7.
  4. ^ Para. 17.
  5. ^ Para. 28.
  6. ^ Para. 1.

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=R_v_Beaulac&oldid=774423183"