vu en – -Translation – Keybot Dictionary

Spacer TTN Translation Network TTN TTN Login Deutsch Français Spacer Help
Source Languages Target Languages
Keybot 54 Results  scc.lexum.org  Page 2
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Droit criminel—Entrave à agent de la paix—Cycliste vu en train de commettre une infraction aux règles de la circulation—Demande d’identité adressée par un constable dans l’intention de lui donner une contravention—Refus du cycliste de donner son identité—Motor-vehicle Act, R.S.B.C. 1960, chap. 253, art. 2, 58, 63, 127 et 128, modifié par 1975 (B.C.), chap. 46, art. 121 et 173(1)—Police Act, 1974 (B.C.), chap. 64, art. 17(1), 22 et 30—Summary Convictions Act, R.S.B.C. 1960, chap. 373, art. 101—Code criminel, S.R.C. 1970, chap.
Criminal law—Obstructing peace officer—Cyclist seen committing traffic infraction—Police officer asking cyclist for identification with intention of giving traffic ticket—Cyclist refusing to give name—Motor-vehicle Act, R.S.B.C. 1960, c. 253, ss. 2, 58, 63, 127, 128, amended 1975 (B.C.), c. 46, ss. 121, 173(1)—Police Act, 1974 (B.C.), c. 64, ss. 17(1), 22, 30—Summary Convictions Act, R.S.B.C. 1960, c. 373, s. 101—Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, s. 450(2).
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
91(24) de l’A.A.N.B. investit le Parlement du Canada d’un pouvoir législatif exclusif sur les «Indiens et les terres réservées pour les Indiens», et vu que les terres en cause n’ont jamais été cédées à la Couronne, vu en outre que le fédéral est chargé de l’administration et de la gestion des terres réservées aux Indiens, j’estime que la Couronne peut à bon droit revendiquer auprès des défendeurs la possession, au profit des Indiens, des biens-fonds en question.
In the two authorities cited the lands had been surrendered by the Indians to the Crown, and the substantial point in issue in both cases was whether in virtue of secs. 109 and 117 of the British North America Act such lands had passed to the Crown in the right of the province interested. Here there has been no surrender […] The Parliament of Canada, in virtue of sec. 91(24) B.N.A. Act has exclusive legislative authority over “Indians and lands reserved for Indians,” and there never having been any surrender of the lands in question to the Crown, and the control, direction and management of lands reserved for Indians being in the Dominion, I think the Crown is entitled to seek possession of the property in question from the defendants for the benefit of the Indians.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
L’accusé est vu en train de chercher la victime le jour du meurtre. Une bande‑vidéo le montre entrant dans son immeuble d’habitation, situé à un pâté de maisons du lieu du crime, moins d’une heure après la découverte du corps poignardé du défunt.
The accused was seen looking for the deceased on the morning the deceased was killed.  A videotape showed the accused entering his own apartment building, located one block from the crime scene, less than an hour after the deceased had been found stabbed.  Under warrant, the police seized from the accused’s apartment a napkin with the deceased’s pager number on it.  The accused was charged with the deceased’s murder shortly after a jailhouse informant reported that he had overheard a conversation between the accused and a third inmate.  According to the informant, the accused told the third inmate that he had purchased drugs from the deceased and stabbed him.  Although the informant was called as a witness at the preliminary hearing, the prosecutor has not yet received approval from the Attorney General’s in-custody informer committee to call him at trial.  The accused brought a McClure application for an order compelling production of the files, documents and notes, if any, relating to communications between the appellant and his lawyers concerning the appellant’s involvement in the deceased’s death.  The motions judge found that the accused had satisfied both the threshold question and the innocence at stake test of the McClure application.  He ordered production of one document and portions of other documents.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Le fait qu'il ait dit à Snowbird d'arrêter quand il l'a vu en train d'étrangler la victime indique que, si l'appelant avait jamais été partie à des infractions, il s'était retiré à ce moment‑là de tout acte conjoint avec Snowbird qui comportait le meurtre de Mme Johnson.
However, there was no evidence that the appellant knew or had any reason to believe that death was likely to result from the sexual assault.  Nor did the death result from the sexual assault.  Rather, as stated above, the jury must have found that the death occurred due to strangulation.  There was no evidence that the appellant was a party to Snowbird's strangulation and suffocation of Mrs. Johnson.  Once again, the only evidence was that of his statement in which he denied any participation in those acts.  The fact that he told Snowbird to stop when he saw him strangling the victim indicates that if the appellant ever had been a party to any offences, from that point on he had removed himself from any joint enterprise with Snowbird that involved the killing of Mrs. Johnson.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Entre‑temps, le témoin D. W. avait téléphoné à la police.  Deux policiers, les agents Jorgensen et Randhawa, sont arrivés peu après que le second garçon fut sorti des buissons.  Ils ont témoigné avoir vu, en entrant dans le parc, l'appelant accroupi dans les buissons.  L'appelant a tenté de quitter le parc en sautant par‑dessus une clôture, mais il en a été empêché par l'agent Randhawa.  Celui‑ci a fait produire à l'appelant une pièce d'identité, lui a appris qu'il faisait l'objet d'une enquête relativement à de possibles agressions sexuelles contre des enfants et l'a fait monter à l'arrière du fourgon cellulaire dans lequel Randhawa et Jorgensen s'étaient rendus au parc.  Les policiers ont ensuite interrogé les témoins adultes et les plaignants.
The complainants were five and six years old at the time.  Two adult witnesses, D. W. and L. W., lived in a house which was adjacent to the park. They were working in their yard on May 22 at around 5 p.m. when D. W. observed the appellant walking in a crouched position along some bushes at the edge of the park. He was leading a young boy by the hand. When the appellant and the boy disappeared in the bushes, the witness L. W. went closer to attempt to find out what was happening. She saw the appellant and the boy seated together in an unusual position and overheard the appellant say "Let's keep it our secret, it will be our little secret." After the first boy left him in the bushes, a second young boy joined the appellant in the same secluded location. Once again L. W. heard the appellant say "shhh" and "let's keep it our little secret" before the second boy also left the bushes.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
L’autre inculpé, un nommé Rynn, avait fait des aveux et offert un plaidoyer de culpabilité la veille du procès. La seule preuve contre Moore c’est qu’on l’avait vu en compagnie de Rynn avant et après le temps où ce dernier avait commis l’infraction.
The Moore case involved a burglary. There was no direct evidence. The other accused, one Rynn, had confessed and submitted a plea of guilty the day before the trial. The only evidence against Moore was that he had been seen in Rynn’s company before and after the time when the latter commited the offence. It was quite properly held that the plea of guilty by Rynn could not be relied on to convict Moore, without other evidence of his participation in the act. In his reasons Lord Goddard L.C.J. said (at p. 54):
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
La notion de «pris sur le fait» ou «vu en train de commettre une infraction» n’est pas inconnue. Le concept a parfois servi à donner un pouvoir d’arrestation quand l’infraction est commise en présence de celui qui procède à l’arrestation.
The notion of “found committing” or “within his view” is not unknown. The concept has been resorted to on occasion to give a power of arrest where the offence is committed in the presence of the arrester. But even here the application of the concept is not without problems. In an article “Arrest: a General View”, [1966] Crim. L.R. 639, at p. 645, the following appears:
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Le seul témoignage défavorable c'est que l'appelant a été momentanément vu en état de démarche chancelante, et qu'il marmonnait au moment où on l'a vu couché sur un divan; or ce sont là des symptômes compatibles avec la maladie diagnostiquée.
To find intoxication in the present case, and hence to conclude that the failure to appear was unjustified, is to give testimonial cogency to evidence that is not far short of surmise, when related to other evidence in the case by witnesses much better situated to speak to that fact. No one testified to any odour of alcohol; the evidence on this was that there was none. The only adverse evidence was to the effect that the appellant was momentarily seen to be unsteady on his feet and that he mumbled when seen lying on a chesterfield, symptoms that are consistent with the diagnosed illness. The adverse evidence defies the principle of proof on a balance of probabilities let alone proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
10 L’intimé Jason Brown est vu en train de chercher Baksh le jour du meurtre. Il est aussi à la recherche d’un vélo de montagne qu’il lui aurait donné dans le cadre d’une transaction en matière de drogue.
10 The respondent Jason Brown was seen looking for Baksh on the morning that Baksh was killed.  Brown was also looking for a mountain bike that he had allegedly fronted to Baksh as part of a drug deal.  Witnesses stated that Brown had in his possession a napkin, on which Baksh’s pager number was written in red ink.  A videotape showed Brown entering his own apartment building, located one block from the crime scene, at 4:47 a.m. on July 21, 1998, less than an hour after Baksh had been found stabbed.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
33 La Cour d’appel semble estimer que l’obligation d’accommodement devait être appréciée au moment où l’employée s’était vu en définitive refuser une mesure additionnelle (par. 31). À mon avis, cette approche repose sur une compartimentation des différents problèmes de santé de l’employée.
33 The Court of Appeal appears to have held that the duty to accommodate must be assessed as of the time the employee was effectively denied an additional measure (para. 31).  In my view, this approach is based on a compartmentalization of the employee’s various health problems.  Undue hardship resulting from the employee’s absence must be assessed globally starting from the beginning of the absence, not from the expiry of the three‑year period.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Bien qu’on ait appliqué aux arrestations la notion de «vu en train de commettre une infraction», son application à l’obligation de révéler son identité est une curieuse innovation. Elle va à l’encontre de toute la jurisprudence.
Although the idea of “within his view” has been applied to arrests, its application is relation to a duty to disclose identity is novel and bizarre. It runs counter to all authority. The right to remain silent, enunciated in Rice v. Connolly, does not admit of such erosion. There is nothing in the language nor in the facts of that case to suggest that the broad principle ceased to have application in the event of a police officer witnessing an infraction.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
[165] Premièrement, comme nous l’avons vu en ce qui concerne l’inscription, les termes clairs de la Loi assujettissent le droit de voter à l’inscription sur la liste électorale ou au dépôt d’un certificat d’inscription (art. 149).
[167] Third, such an approach would be unfair.  It disregards the fact that other qualified electors who did not follow the necessary steps to become entitled to vote may have rightly been turned away from the polling station and not permitted to vote on election day. The Act sets out the rules and procedures electors must follow in order to exercise their constitutional right to vote. Those rules must be applied fairly and consistently if the right is to have meaning.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Comme nous l’avons vu, la question de savoir si Mme McLeod était capable d’identifier l’accusé comme étant son agresseur, ou si elle l’a simplement identifié comme étant l’homme qu’elle a vu en état d’arrestation et lors des audiences précédentes, est une question qu’il appartient au jury de trancher en définitive.
93 In the same paragraph (para. 52), my colleague says that the trial judge should have stressed that Mrs. McLeod could not have divorced her previous recollection of the assailant from the mental images she formed after having seen the appellant arrested by the police on television. I disagree that a caution of this nature should have been given by the trial judge. As I discussed above, whether Mrs. McLeod was able to identify the accused as her assailant, or whether she was merely identifying him as the man she saw being arrested and at previous hearings, was ultimately a question for the jury to answer.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
Les autres mandats de perquisition se rapportant à cette opération avaient déjà été exécutés et M. Nguyen, le seul individu soupçonné de faire le trafic de drogues ou d’être membre d’un gang qui avait jamais été vu en train d’entrer dans le domicile, était déjà détenu par la police.
[65] Shortly before executing their warrant to search the Cornell home, the police observed Lorraine and Ashley Cornell leave and drive away.  The other search warrants relating to this operation had already been executed, and Mr. Nguyen, the only suspected drug dealer or gang member ever observed entering the dwelling, was already in police custody.  The police made no effort to intercept the departing women in order to secure — or at least attempt to secure — a nonviolent, peaceful means of entering the residence  to search within.  Instead, some 15 minutes later, the tactical team made its unannounced and violent “dynamic entry”.
  Cour suprême du Canada ...  
La Cour d’appel semble estimer que l’obligation d’accommodement devait être appréciée au moment où l’employée s’était vu en définitive refuser une mesure additionnelle (par. 31). À mon avis, cette approche repose sur une compartimentation des différents problèmes de santé de l’employée.
The Court of Appeal appears to have held that the duty to accommodate must be assessed as of the time the employee was effectively denied an additional measure (para. 31).  In my view, this approach is based on a compartmentalization of the employee’s various health problems.  Undue hardship resulting from the employee’s absence must be assessed globally starting from the beginning of the absence, not from the expiry of the three‑year period.
Arrow 1 2 3 4 Arrow