vu un – -Translation – Keybot Dictionary

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	le matin du 11 octobre, il a vu sur le chemin à environ 3 milles et demi à 4 milles au nord de Buchanan, un homme portant des vêtements foncés qu’il n’a pas identifié comme étant l’appelant. Il importe de noter que si l’on ajoute foi au témoignage du conducteur, l’accident s’est produit à trois milles au nord de Buchanan et non où Swanton dit avoir vu un piéton.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	hours of the morning of October 11 and when about 3½ to 4 miles north of Buchanan he saw a man wearing dark clothes on the road whom he did not identify as being the appellant. It is significant to observe that if the evidence of the respondent driver is accepted, the accident happened 3 miles north of Buchanan and not where Swanton said he saw a pedestrian.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	Et c’est précisément parce que les faits pertinents en l’espèce se sont produits dans d’étroites limites de temps et d’espace que je souscris aux conclusions suivant lesquelles le conducteur du camion n’a pas été négligent. Sa réaction de freiner à fond, lorsqu’il a vu un piéton gesticulant et s’est rendu compte qu’il devait y avoir eu un accident «là», a été une réaction normale.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	And it is precisely because the events relevant to this case took place within narrow confines of time and space that I concur in the findings that the truck driver was not negligent. His reaction to apply the brakes hard was a natural one when he saw a gesturing pedestrian and realized that an accident must have occurred “there”.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	William Cowan, un ami de Day, a témoigné avoir vu un Blanc et un Noir participer à l'altercation avec Day. Cependant, il n'a pas bien vu le Noir et n'a pu l'identifier à l'aide d'une photographie. Il n'a vu personne brandir un couteau pendant l'altercation.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	William Cowan, a friend of Day's, testified that he saw a white man and a black man involved in an altercation with Day.  However, he did not get a good look at the black man, nor could he make a photographic identification.  Cowan did not see anyone wield a knife during the altercation.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	[TRADUCTION] J’avançais sur le chemin Kildare en direction est-ouest, lorsque à l’intersection de Kildare et Smart j’ai vu un enfant courir en avant du camion stationné là. J’ai obliqué vers la gauche autant que possible, mais je n’ai pu l’éviter et le côté droit de ma benne l’a frappé.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	I was travelling on Kildare Rd. from East to West when at the corner of Kildare and Smart I saw a child running in front of the truck parked there. I pulled to the left as much as possible but could not avoid him and hit him with my right side box. (Emphasis added)

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Outre cette preuve circonstancielle, le ministère public a aussi produit une preuve d’identification provenant de divers automobilistes qui ont affirmé avoir vu un taxi de Montréal circuler sur l’autoroute entre Montréal et Ottawa.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

9 In addition to the foregoing circumstantial evidence, the Crown also introduced identification evidence from several motorists who testified to seeing a Montreal taxicab on the highway between Montreal and Ottawa.  Only one of these witnesses, Sidney Ritchie, actually placed Ménard in the taxicab with the deceased.  Ritchie’s evidence was challenged at trial on the ground that Ritchie had failed to pick the appellant out of a photo lineup and had only been able to make a positive identification at the preliminary inquiry, when the appellant was the only man in the room aside from counsel and court staff.  Moreover, Ritchie had been advised at that time that the appellant was the person charged with the murder.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Il est évident que dans les solutions qu'elle a adoptées, la Cour d'appel à la majorité a vu un moyen de permettre à la mère naturelle d'exercer un droit de visite. Si l'enfant est une pupille de la Cour, la Cour peut lui accorder un droit de visite tout en laissant l'enfant à la garde des Racine si c'est la meilleure solution.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

The majority of the Court of Appeal obviously saw in their alternate courses a means of keeping the door open for access to the natural mother. If the child were a ward of the Court the Court could grant her access while maintaining custody in the Racines if this seemed appropriate. Similarly, if a new trial were ordered as to custody, access rights could be claimed in those proceedings. The majority were loath to close the door on access by the finality of an adoption order. With respect, I think this overlooks something—something adverted to by Mr. Justice Hall when he said:

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	A son premier interrogatoire par la police, l’appelant a d’abord dit qu’il avait vu un homme attaquer une fille, mais quelques heures plus tard dans une déclaration à la police, il a admis avoir causé sa mort.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	The body of the deceased was found at the location described by the appellant. Her clothing was in a state of disarray, consistent with her having been unclothed and partially reclothed. When initially questioned by the police, the appellant said he had witnessed a man attacking a girl, but some hours later in a statement to the police he admitted having caused her death.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	[TRADUCTION] Ahmed Hassan a affirmé avoir entendu courir dans la pharmacie et avoir vu un homme portant un masque, une cagoule sur le visage et une carabine. Selon sa description, l'homme mesurait de 5 pi 7 po à 5 pi 8 po, il était plutôt mince et devait faire 140 lbs.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	Ahmed Hassan stated that he heard some running in the pharmacy and saw a man with a mask, a toque over his face, carrying a rifle.  He described this man as 5'7" to 8", kind of slim, 140 pounds.  He was wearing a blue denim jacket with a white collar, blue prints and a toque.  He said the man had blue eyes and a blonde mustache.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	Q    O.K.  Et y avez‑vous vu un policier?
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	Q    Okay.  And did you see a police officer there?

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	Mme Sorra a témoigné qu’elle conduisait à une vitesse de 40 à 45 milles à l’heure et avait vu un panneau près de McKellar indiquant que la vitesse maximum permise était de 50 milles à l’heure. Elle a déclaré n’avoir vu aucune autre signalisation de limite de vitesse et rien dans la
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	Mrs. Sorra testified that she was driving at a speed of from 40 to 45 miles an hour and that as she drove she saw a sign near McKellar to the effect that the speed limit was 50 miles an hour. She says she saw no other speed signs and there was no evidence that any such signs existed.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	Ce témoignage permet de conclure avec certitude que Slobodian n’a pas agi comme il l’a fait uniquement parce qu’il a vu un piéton qui lui faisait signe d’arrêter. Si la route n’avait pas été
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	This is conclusive evidence that Slobodian did not act as he did simply on account of seeing a pedestrian waving for him to stop. Had the highway been clear, I cannot think he would

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	…J’ai vu un enfant courir en avant du camion stationné là.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	…I saw a child running in front of the truck parked there.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	Ford a témoigné qu'un certain nombre de Noirs étaient présents au moment de l'agression, qu'il avait vu un individu correspondant au signalement général de Semester s'approcher de la galerie, passer la main à travers les barreaux puis s'enfuir.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	Ford testified that a number of black men were present during the assault and that he saw an individual matching Semester's general description approach the porch, stick his hand through the porch railing, and then flee.  Ford further testified that he noticed moments later that the same man was carrying a knife.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	Au moment où le vol a été commis, ou à peu près vers ce moment-là, les témoins Goddard et Straight ont vu un ancien modèle de Chevrolet, de couleur claire, en stationnement sur un chemin de traverse non loin du remonte-pente Whistler, et ils ont tous deux identifié l’intimé Moncini comme personne assise dans cette voiture.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	At or about the time the bank was robbed, the witnesses Goddard and Straight saw an older model, light-coloured Chevrolet parked on a side road not far from Whistler ski lift and both witnesses identified the respondent Moncini as sitting in that car.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	Je suis entré dans un appartement de la rue Friel, je l’ai fouillé et je n’ai pas trouvé d’argent. J’avais pris un couteau dans la cuisine de cet appartement. Alors que je descendais l’escalier de service, j’ai vu un homme et une femme. L’homme m’est tombé dessus et je l’ai poignardé.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	…then I drove around, looking for an apartment that I could go into, to steal. I got into one apartment on Friel Street, looked around inside, in which I did not find any money. I had taken a knife from the kitchen of that apartment. Going down the back stairs, I notice a man and a woman. The man started coming down at me, I stabbed him. From there I ran to my car…

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	L'appelant a avoué avoir commis des voies de fait simples mais a nié avoir commis des voies de fait graves. Il a déclaré en témoignage avoir vu un homme de race noire, qu'il a identifié comme étant Jason Semester, s'approcher de la galerie armé d'un couteau, poignarder Heffern et s'enfuir.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	The appellant admitted common assault but denied aggravated assault, and gave evidence that he saw a black man, whom he identified as Jason Semester, approach the porch with a knife, stab Heffern and flee.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Le policier a dégrafé le pantalon de G, puis a tiré vers l’arrière le pantalon et le caleçon long de ce dernier. Il a vu un emballage de plastique transparent qui dépassait des fesses de G et une substance blanche à l’intérieur de cet emballage.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

Following the arrests, a police officer conducted a “pat down” search of G and did not find any weapons or narcotics.  The officer then decided to conduct a visual inspection of G’s underwear and buttocks on the landing at the top of the stairwell leading to a basement where public washrooms were located.  The officer undid G’s pants and pulled them back along with G’s long underwear.  The officer saw a clear plastic wrap protruding from between G’s buttocks, as well as a white substance within the wrap.  The officer tried to retrieve the plastic wrap, but G  “hip‑checked” and scratched him.  G was then escorted to a seating booth at the back of the shop.  The officers forced him to bend over a table and his pants were lowered to his knees and his underwear was pulled down.  The officers tried to seize the package from his  buttocks, but were unsuccessful.  Following these attempts, G  accidentally defecated; however, the package did not dislodge.  An officer then retrieved a pair of rubber dishwashing gloves and again tried to remove the package while G was face‑down on the floor, with another officer holding down his feet.  Finally, the officer was able to remove the package once G unclenched his muscles.  It contained 10.1 grams of crack cocaine.  G was placed under arrest for possession of a narcotic for the purpose of trafficking, and for police assault.  He was strip searched again at the police station, fingerprinted and detained pending a bail hearing.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

A peu près au même moment, un bruit fort comme un coup de fusil ou un raté de moteur a attiré l’attention d’un passant qui a vu un homme dans le parc de stationnement courir jusqu’à une fourgonnette pour y monter.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

The victim of this murder was shot while in a parking lot separating the Town Manor hotel from the Elmar hotel in the City of Hamilton at approximately 11:50 p.m. on the 21st of September, 1974. At about this time the sound of a loud noise, like a shot or backfire, attracted the attention of a passerby to the parking lot where he saw a man running to and entering a brown or copper-coloured van with lettering on its side which he later identified from a photograph as bearing the name of “Barber Appliance Services”. On entering the parking lot, this witness found the body of the victim lying on the ground with a gun shot wound in his neck which proved to be a fatal injury. The van had been parked about five feet from where the body was found and a man was seen running towards it and entering the driver’s side although leaving the door ajar. Two other witnesses testified that they had observed the van leaving the parking lot and one of them was able to take what he thought was the number of the licence plate. I agree with the Chief Justice that the driver of the van at this time was undoubtedly the murderer and I feel that the identity of this individual is the pivotal or vital question in the determination of this case. In this regard the evidence is indeed

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Il est sorti de l’auto‑patrouille, il a dit à ces hommes de sortir de la voiture, il n’a pas fait de mises en garde, il ne les a pas informés de leurs droits, il leur a seulement dit de sortir de la voiture, et le passager est sorti le premier, suivi du défendeur. Après que le passager est sorti, il a vu un sac de marijuana sur le plancher du côté du passager et, cela étant, il a plaqué les deux hommes contre le capot de la voiture.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

The officer also says that he saw the accused throw something or thought he saw him throw something to the other side of the car and I think at that point based on everything he came to the conclusion that there was something illegal going on in the car, probably a drug – if not a drug transaction then at least a drug use.  And at that point he made what I think in all the circumstances was a decision that was based on determining whether or not there was any drugs in that car and if so, getting his mitts on it.  He got out of the police car, he told these gentlemen to get out of their car, he didn’t warn them, he didn’t caution them, he didn’t give them their rights, he just told them to get out of the car and the passenger got out first and subsequently the defendant got out.  After the passenger got out he saw a bag of marijuana on the floor of the car on the passenger side and that being so he had the two men on the hood of the car.  He took the defendant over and put him in the back of the police car, told him he was under arrest for possession, didn’t caution him, didn’t give him his rights, went back, called for backup who quickly arrived and took the other man into custody.  Subsequently he took the accused back to the police station.  He tells us that he cautioned him, gave him his rights.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

S’il s’était arrêté et avait regardé à sa droite avant de s’engager sur le passage à niveau, il aurait inévitablement vu un train qui s’approchait à 50 milles à l’heure en faisant sonner sa cloche et entendre son sifflet.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

In the course of the reasons for judgment which he has prepared for delivery in this case, my brother Spence recognizes that the crossing was clearly visible to Kim in time for him to stop his vehicle before proceeding onto it and that there was also a sign, which was there to be seen, erected by the G.N. Railways on the east side of the road about 10 or 15 feet from the crossing warning that persons using it did so at their own risk. My brother Spence would attribute 25 per cent of the fault for the accident to the driver for his failure to stop sooner and I think that the main differences between us are that (i) I would not disturb the finding of the trial judge that “visibility had nothing to do with the accident” and (ii) in my view it was not the condition of the sign but the failure of Kim to stop after he had actual notice of the crossing which caused the collision. Had he stopped and looked to his right before entering the crossing, he would have inevitably seen a train approaching at 50 miles an hour, ringing its bell and sounding its whistle. There is no evidence that Kim failed to see the sign and his actions as he crested the hill strongly indicate that he appreciated the desirability of slowing down. There is no explanation as to why he accelerat-

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Elle était alors seule à l’extérieur d’un bar de Prince George, en Colombie‑Britannique. Un chauffeur de taxi a vu un homme seul, au volant d’un véhicule qui lui a semblé être une petite camionnette grise de marque Toyota ou Nissan, s’arrêter à côté de Marnie Blanchard.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

3 Marnie Blanchard was last seen at approximately 2:00 a.m. on November 22, 1989, standing alone outside a bar in Prince George, British Columbia.  A taxi driver saw a lone male driver of what he believed was a small grey Toyota or Nissan pickup truck pull up beside Marnie Blanchard.  He saw that the driver of the truck had black shoulder‑length hair and some hair on the side of his face.  He observed Ms. Blanchard hesitate and then get into the truck, which drove away.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

[5] Un deuxième témoin oculaire de la fusillade, le père Yvon Lavoie, a vu une partie de la scène à partir de la fenêtre du presbytère donnant sur le stationnement situé sur la rue Workman. Le père Lavoie a vu un homme de profil qui tenait une arme dans sa main droite.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

[5] A second eyewitness to the shooting, Father Yvon Lavoie, observed part of the scene from the window of the presbytery overlooking the parking lot on Workman Street.  Father Lavoie saw the profile of a man with a weapon in his right hand.  He saw the man fire three shots in a downward direction, but could not see at whom or what the man was shooting.  Father Lavoie was unable to identify the shooter from police photos, nor could he identify Griffin as the assailant in court.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

On a déclaré en preuve avoir entendu un bruit comme un raté de moteur ou un coup de feu dans le terrain de stationnement et avoir vu un homme courir vers une fourgonnette stationnée pour s’enfuir à son volant.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

The deceased, victim of the killing, one Maurice Rodriguez, had been seen in one of the beverage rooms in the Elmar Hotel in Hamilton, Ontario, on the evening of September 21, 1974 and was also seen to leave by himself at about 11:30 p.m. He was shot and killed a short time later in a parking area between the Elmar and another hotel. There was evidence of a noise like a backfire or a shot being heard, coming from the parking area, and of a man seen running to a parked van which he drove away. Several witnesses described the van which had Barber Appliance Services written on the side and one witness noted the licence number as it was driven away. Shortly after midnight, about 12:05 or 12:10 a.m. in the morning of September 22, 1974, the van was located in the driveway of a house belonging to the witness Penoffio. The fact that the witness who took the licence number was mistaken as to one digit of the licence did not impede the speedy discovery of the van. The house, at 87 Augusta Avenue, was about three to five minutes’ driving time distant from the Elmar Hotel.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

La vigie sur la passerelle a vu un feu blanc, puis le capitaine a aperçu les deux feux de tête de mât, encore ouverts à tribord, et noté qu’il était 0029, ce qui correspond au témoignage produit par l’autre partie d’un ordre de «tribord toute» à 0029 précises.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

On the Marie Skou this cannot have contributed to the accident. The lookout on the bridge did see a white light and the master then saw both top lights when still open to starboard. He noted the time as 0029, which is exactly in accordance with the evidence from the other side that the hard starboard order was given precisely at 0029. It might also be observed that the combined speed of the two ships being 24 knots and the collision having occurred three minutes later, this means that the lights of the Chitose Maru were effectively seen at the upper limit of the range of visibility estimated by the master of the Marie Skou that is 0.8 to 1.0 mile. On the other hand, the absence of a lookout on the forecastle of the Chitose Maru was much more serious her bridge being more than five hundred feet aft, not less than two hundred. Putting both ships in pari delicto on that account might be proper on an abstract technical consideration of the observance of the regulations, but, with respect, it is erroneous in the allocation of liability where actual influence in the outcome is the criterion.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL	[TRADUCTION] J’ai vu un homme pareil, mais il n’avait pas les cheveux gris, c’est pourquoi je ne jure pas que c’est lui.
Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain	It will be seen that there was no identification The Hollands merely pointed out a resemblance but with one difference noted by the husband

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

L’intimé la recevait sur le tablier opposé pour la placer sur un véhicule en vue de son transport ultérieur. Cette raboteuse était d’un modèle vieillot et, vu un défaut de la poulie motrice, celle-ci ne pouvait pas tourner à une vitesse normale ce qui provoquait des accumulations de copeaux.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

The appellant en reprise d’instance was working for the respondent, a farmer, using a planing machine for the purpose of planing the surface of hardwood boards. The appellant was placing the boards on the front table of the machine and pushing them at and under the knives. The respondent was receiving them on the opposite table and placing them up on a cart to be later taken away. This machine was of an antiquated model and, due to a defect in the moving pulley which was preventing it from turning at the normal speed, there were accumulations of shavings. On the day of the accident, without having ever been requested by the respondent and without the knowledge of the latter, the appellant undertook to remove the shavings accumulated on the machine on the side where respondent was working, and putting his hand too close to the knives, knowing the direction in which they rotated, he had his fingers cut. The Superior Court dismissed the action brought by the appellant and this judgment was confirmed by the Court of Appeal. Hence the appeal to this Court. The appellant contends that the use of a machine of an antiquated model with a defect in the moving pulley which prevents the latter from turning at the normal speed would not be tolerated in an establishment covered by the Industrial and Commercial Establishments Act, R.S.Q. 1941, c. 175.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

A peu près au même moment, un bruit fort comme un coup de fusil ou un raté de moteur a attiré l’attention d’un passant qui a vu un homme dans le parc de stationnement courir jusqu’à une fourgonnette pour y monter.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

The victim of this murder was shot while in a parking lot separating the Town Manor hotel from the Elmar hotel in the City of Hamilton at approximately 11:50 p.m. on the 21st of September, 1974. At about this time the sound of a loud noise, like a shot or backfire, attracted the attention of a passerby to the parking lot where he saw a man running to and entering a brown or copper-coloured van with lettering on its side which he later identified from a photograph as bearing the name of “Barber Appliance Services”. On entering the parking lot, this witness found the body of the victim lying on the ground with a gun shot wound in his neck which proved to be a fatal injury. The van had been parked about five feet from where the body was found and a man was seen running towards it and entering the driver’s side although leaving the door ajar. Two other witnesses testified that they had observed the van leaving the parking lot and one of them was able to take what he thought was the number of the licence plate. I agree with the Chief Justice that the driver of the van at this time was undoubtedly the murderer and I feel that the identity of this individual is the pivotal or vital question in the determination of this case. In this regard the evidence is indeed

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Madame DeCoen a déclaré qu’elle n’avait jamais vu un enfant avec autant d’ecchymoses. Elle a indiqué qu’elle était « consternée par le nombre d’ecchymoses et leur différent stade de guérison ». Elle a reconnu qu’elle n’était pas spécialiste de l’évolution des ecchymoses, mais elle s’est dite en mesure de déterminer, à partir de leur coloration, que les ecchymoses ne dataient pas toutes du même moment.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

Nurse DeCoen said that she had never before seen a child with that degree of bruising. She says that she was “shocked by the number of bruises and their various stages of healing”. She admits that she is not an expert in the aging of bruises, but expressed the opinion that she could tell from the colouring that the bruises were of different ages. She described more recent bruising as being purplish and blue in colour, perhaps with some redness around the edges. She says older bruises are brownish or grey. She described some of the bruising on the child as being older and some fresh, but that the majority of the bruising seemed older. DeCoen did not map or chart the bruises, their location, or their respective descriptions on the body. She conceded on cross-examination that her primary focus was life-saving and not on the bruises. From her experience, most of the bruises appeared to be over 24 hours old. She also believed that some of the bruises appeared to be a couple of days old. [A.R., at p. 553]

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Lorsque je dis près, je veux dire à quelques pouces de celles‑ci. Lorsque je suis entré dans la boutique, j'ai senti de la fumée et j'ai également vu un léger nuage de fumée. Je ne pouvais dire si la fumée provenait de fils électriques qui brûlaient, mais j'ai présumé qu'il s'agissait de l'aspirateur.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

When I returned at 18:15 I looked at the vacuum        cleaner and it was so hot that I could not touch it. The vacuum cleaner was sitting very close to                                         empty cardboard boxes. When I say close, I mean                    inches. When I walked into the store I could smell              smoke and I could also see a very fine cloud of                    smoke. I could not tell whether the smoke was of               burning electrical wires but I presumed it was the                    vacuum cleaner. It was at this time after placing                  the vacuum cleaner in the basement area that we                    left. After dropping the girls off I returned home                  arriving at approximately 19:00 hours. When I                    walked into the house my wife informed me about the         fire and I returned to store.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

L’établissement d’un régime relatif à des infractions provinciales mineures plus expéditif, plus efficace et moins coûteux était à ses yeux un objectif suffisamment important pour justifier une telle restriction. De plus, il a vu un lien rationnel entre le régime établi à l’art.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

3                 The respondents appealed their convictions to the Court of Queen’s Bench the only defence relied on being the unconstitutionality of s. 16 of the Act, but they were not successful.  Deschênes J., following the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in R. v. Carson (1983), 147 D.L.R. (3d) 754, and the decision of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench in R. v. Greckol (1991), 64 C.C.C. (3d) 430, which concerned similar provisions, found that s. 16 of the Act infringed s. 11(d) of the Charter.  He was of the opinion, however, that the limitation on the s. 11(d) rights of persons charged with offences was justifiable under s. 1.  In his view, the objective of establishing a more expeditious and efficient and less costly scheme for minor provincial offences was important enough to justify such a limitation.  He also saw a rational connection between the scheme set up under s. 16 of the Act and this objective of efficiency in the context of offences under the Motor Vehicle Act.  Referring to this Court’s decision in R. v. Swain, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 933, he stated that he was satisfied that s. 16 comes within the range of means that impair the rights guaranteed by s. 11(d) of the Charter as little as possible.  Deschênes J. concluded that the salutary effects of the measure adopted in s. 16 were sufficiently proportional to its deleterious effects.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Très tôt le matin du 20 octobre, un résident de la région, où l'on a retrouvé le taxi, s'est réveillé et a vu un taxi arrêté, phares éteints, dans son allée. Il entendit du tapage, des portes s'ouvrir et se fermer, puis le taxi démarrer par saccades comme si le conducteur n'était pas habitué au véhicule.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

In the early morning hours of October 20, a resident of the area where the taxicab was later found awoke to see a taxi in his lane way with its lights out.  There was a commotion heard, with doors opening and closing and the taxi eventually drove away, in a jerky fashion as if the driver were not used to the vehicle.  The spot where the taxi was later found is about 20 to 24 miles from the Brunswick Hotel, and the taxi meter indicated that the cab had travelled about 22 miles during its last trip.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

67 Selon moi, l’al. 20(1)f) n’a jamais été censé s’appliquer aux pertes sur change.  Comme nous l’avons vu, un certain nombre de facteurs, qui ont généralement trait au libellé de la disposition, sont déterminants à cet égard.  Cette interprétation reflète on ne peut mieux la structure de la LIR et l’intention du législateur.  La disposition est censée s’appliquer à une catégorie précise de frais de financement découlant de l’émission de titres de créance à escompte.  Par contre, l’interprétation que préconisent les intimées dans les présents pourvois fait de l’al. 20(1)f) une disposition générale prévoyant la déductibilité d’un large éventail de frais liés au financement en devises étrangères, en l’absence de mention de ces frais dans le texte de la LIR et malgré le fait que ces frais sont généralement considérés comme étant au titre du capital.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

67 In my view, s. 20(1)(f) was never intended to apply to foreign exchange losses.  As we have seen above, a number of factors, which generally relate to the wording of the provision, are determinative in this respect.  This interpretation best reflects the structure of the ITA and the intent of Parliament.  The purpose of the provision is to address a specific class of financing costs arising out of the issuance of debt instruments at a discount.  The interpretation advanced by the respondents in these appeals, on the other hand, turns s. 20(1)(f) into a broad provision allowing for the deductibility of a wide range of costs attendant upon financing in foreign currency, in the absence of any mention of such costs in the text of the ITA, and despite the fact that such costs are usually regarded as being on capital account.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

La Commission de réforme du droit de l’Ontario a conclu, en 1991, qu’il était difficile de dégager les principes justifiant l’application de frais d’homologation ad valorem, et que [traduction] «[l]e seul fondement du barème de frais progressifs semble être qu’on y a vu un moyen approprié de générer des recettes» (Report on Administration of Estates of Deceased Persons, à la p. 286).

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

19 The probate levy also meets the fourth Lawson criterion for a tax as the proceeds were intended for a public purpose.  The Ontario Law Reform Commission concluded in 1991 that it is difficult to discern a principled justification for ad valorem probate fees, and that “[t]he only rationale for the graduated fee schedule appears to be that it has been regarded as a suitable vehicle for raising revenue” (Report on Administration of Estates of Deceased Persons, at p. 286).

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

A peu près au même moment, un bruit, comme un coup de fusil ou un raté de moteur, a attiré l’attention d’un passant qui a vu un homme dans le parc de stationnement courir jusqu’à une fourgonnette de couleur brune ou cuivrée dont le flanc portait une inscription qu’il a par la suite identifiée comme étant le nom de «Barber Appliance Services».

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

The victim in this murder was shot in a parking lot separating two Hamilton hotels at approximately 11:50 p.m. on September 21, 1974. At about the same time noise like a shot or a backfire attracted the attention of a passerby to the parking lot where he saw a man running to a brown or copper coloured van with lettering which he later identified as the name “Barber Appliance Services”. This witness on entering the parking lot found the body of the victim on the ground with what proved to be a fatal gun shot wound in the neck. The van had been some five feet from the body and a man was seen running towards it and entering the driver’s side while leaving the door ajar. Two other witnesses testified that they had seen the van and one was able to take down what he thought was the number of the licence plate. It seemed clear that the driver of the van at this time was the murderer. The evidence was inconsistent with any other rational explanation. The identified van was on the night in question in the custody of Penoffio, the firm’s Hamilton manager. Penoffio lived in a house at 87 Augusta Street, Hamilton, which was also occupied by a friend named Matthews and which the accused was visiting on the evening in question. The van was found next to this address shortly after the shooting and at that time the house was occupied by the accused, Penoffio and Matthews. Both Penoffio and Matthews were obviously potential suspects but neither told a story putting the other in the hotel parking lot at the fatal hour. The Crown’s case depended almost entirely on circumstantial evidence although in so far as the statements of the accused and Penoffio were self-serving they were dependent upon the jury’s assessment of their respective credibility. The accused was convicted of murder and his appeal was dismissed without recorded reasons by a unanimous Court of Appeal. The order

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Le jour de l’agression, un certain Jason Adams, locataire de l’immeuble d’habitation, a vu un homme avec une bicyclette qui dormait dans le corridor du deuxième étage. Il l’a entraperçu à trois reprises entre 6 h 15 et 6 h 30.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

On the day of the assault, one Jason Adams, a resident of the apartment building, observed a man with a bicycle sleeping in the second floor hallway. He caught quick glimpses of the man on three occasions between 6.15 a.m. and 6.30 a.m. Shortly before 7.00 a.m., another resident observed the sleeping man and informed the victim.  Between 7.00 a.m. and 7.30 a.m., Mr. Adams' wife overheard the victim talking with a male whose voice she did not recognize.  She then heard a noise she believed to be a bicycle going down the flight of stairs.  At approximately 10.30 a.m., the letter carrier found the victim at the bottom of the stairwell on the main floor of the apartment building.  He had been badly beaten.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Dans le cas sous étude, le constituant, en 1867, n'y a certainement pas vu un droit fondamental. Si tel avait été le cas, il l'aurait protégé dans la même mesure partout au Canada. Or le seul effet de la disposition est d'empêcher les diverses législatures de faire marche arrière en matière de confessionnalité scolaire par rapport à la législation en vigueur en 1867 dans leurs territoires respectifs.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

[TRANSLATION]  In the case under consideration, the drafters in 1867 certainly did not see this as a fundamental right.  If they had, it would have been given the same protection throughout Canada.  The only effect of the provision is to prevent various legislatures from backing away from the legislation on denominational schooling in effect in 1867 in their respective territories.  Accordingly, the extent of the constitutional protection varies from one province to another.  By so doing, the drafters were demonstrating not so much a preference towards entrenchment as a desire to facilitate the creation of the proposed federation by disarming the opposition of those who, favouring denominational schools, might fear that a political reorganization would threaten already established legislative protection in this area.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

83 Comme je l’ai fait remarquer précédemment, la juge du procès a conclu que l’actus reus de l’infraction avait été prouvé à l’égard de chacun des quatre chefs d’accusation.  Bien que cette conclusion semble bien fondée en ce qui concerne l’accusation de fraude, il est difficile de trouver au dossier une justification pour les trois autres chefs d’accusation.  Comme nous l’avons vu, un simple « guide pratique » sur la façon de commettre un acte criminel, sans plus, ne semble pas satisfaire au critère retenu dans l’arrêt Sharpe.  Toutefois, aucune question n’a été soulevée quant à la conclusion de la juge du procès relativement à l’actus reus et il n’est pas nécessaire de trancher la question pour statuer sur le présent pourvoi.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

83 As noted earlier, the trial judge concluded that the actus reus of the offence had been proven in respect of each of the four counts.  While this conclusion in respect of the fraud count appears well founded, it is difficult to find support on the record in respect of the three remaining counts.  As discussed earlier, a simple “how to” recipe for committing a crime, without more, does not appear to meet the test adopted in Sharpe.  However, no issue was raised with respect to the trial judge’s conclusion on the actus reus and it is not necessary to decide the matter to dispose of this appeal.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Environ deux heures plus tard, les policiers ont entendu un grand bruit causé par l'effondrement d'une tour de télécommunications. Peu de temps après, les policiers ont vu un autre véhicule, appartenant effectivement à l'appelant, sortir d'un chemin situé dans un champ voisin.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

Appellant was charged with mischief to property.  The Crown sought to introduce evidence of his whereabouts obtained through the use of an electronic tracking device (a "beeper") installed in his car.  The police had had appellant under surveillance for some time since they suspected him of involvement in a recent murder believed to be linked to a series of similar killings.  On July 14, 1987, they had obtained a warrant to search his home and vehicle, but had found nothing to link him to any of the homicides.  The police had towed the car to the police station to carry out the search.  While it was there, but after the warrant had expired, they installed the beeper.  On August 15, the day of the alleged offence, the police had been able to trace the location of appellant's car using the beeper and established surveillance on a vehicle resembling his parked in a driveway.  About two hours later, the police heard a loud crashing sound, caused by the felling of a communications tower.  Soon after, they observed another vehicle, which was in fact appellant's, pull out of a laneway in a nearby field.  On August 26 the police obtained a warrant to search appellant's vehicle.  When the car was vacuumed, melted pieces of metal, consistent with the metal guy wires of the communications tower, were found.  The constant electronic surveillance was maintained until mid-November, when appellant was arrested on the mischief charge.  The trial judge excluded all evidence obtained through the use of the beeper, on the ground that it had been obtained in violation of appellant's right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure under s. 8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  He acquitted appellant.  The Court of Appeal set aside the acquittal and ordered a new trial.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Durant l’enquête, Donald Saint-Pierre identifiera ce véhicule comme étant celui de Laurent Taillefer. Carl Saint-Pierre, quant à lui, a affirmé avoir vu un « Tracker » rouge avec un « toit de vinyle blanc » sur le chemin Baie-Carrières à la suite d’une séance d’hypnose menée par la Sûreté du Québec.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

13 Donald Saint-Pierre, a truck driver, and his 14-year-old son, Carl Saint‑Pierre, testified that they had seen a small red pick-up truck near chemin Baie-Carrières between 5:30 and 6:00 on the morning of March 10, 1990. During the investigation, Donald Saint‑Pierre identified that vehicle as the one belonging to Laurent Taillefer.  Carl Saint‑Pierre said, after a hypnosis session conducted by the Sûreté du Québec, that he had seen a red Tracker with a [translation] “white vinyl roof” on chemin Baie-Carrières.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

48 Enfin, la description que Daye a donné des cercles intérieur et extérieur formés autour de Watts étaye indirectement le témoignage de Lloyd Finter, le commissionnaire de l’hôpital situé de l’autre côté de la rue, en face de la maison de la confrérie. Monsieur Finter a témoigné qu’il avait vu un groupe d’environ 12 personnes entourer Watts et que quatre hommes étaient en train de donner la raclée.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

48 Lastly, Daye’s description of an inner and outer circle around Watts indirectly supports the evidence of Lloyd Finter, the commissionaire at the hospital across the street from the fraternity house.  Mr. Finter testified that he saw a group of about 12 people surrounding Watts, and that four men were administering the beating.  The majority of the Court of Appeal noted that Mr. Finter differed from the majority of the other witnesses who testified as to the number of attackers, but that Mr. Finter left his vantage point or turned away from the attacks on at least six separate occasions.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

A peu près au même moment, un bruit, comme un coup de fusil ou un raté de moteur, a attiré l’attention d’un passant qui a vu un homme dans le parc de stationnement courir jusqu’à une fourgonnette de couleur brune ou cuivrée dont le flanc portait une inscription qu’il a par la suite identifiée comme étant le nom de «Barber Appliance Services».

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

The victim in this murder was shot in a parking lot separating two Hamilton hotels at approximately 11:50 p.m. on September 21, 1974. At about the same time noise like a shot or a backfire attracted the attention of a passerby to the parking lot where he saw a man running to a brown or copper coloured van with lettering which he later identified as the name “Barber Appliance Services”. This witness on entering the parking lot found the body of the victim on the ground with what proved to be a fatal gun shot wound in the neck. The van had been some five feet from the body and a man was seen running towards it and entering the driver’s side while leaving the door ajar. Two other witnesses testified that they had seen the van and one was able to take down what he thought was the number of the licence plate. It seemed clear that the driver of the van at this time was the murderer. The evidence was inconsistent with any other rational explanation. The identified van was on the night in question in the custody of Penoffio, the firm’s Hamilton manager. Penoffio lived in a house at 87 Augusta Street, Hamilton, which was also occupied by a friend named Matthews and which the accused was visiting on the evening in question. The van was found next to this address shortly after the shooting and at that time the house was occupied by the accused, Penoffio and Matthews. Both Penoffio and Matthews were obviously potential suspects but neither told a story putting the other in the hotel parking lot at the fatal hour. The Crown’s case depended almost entirely on circumstantial evidence although in so far as the statements of the accused and Penoffio were self-serving they were dependent upon the jury’s assessment of their respective credibility. The accused was convicted of murder and his appeal was dismissed without recorded reasons by a unanimous Court of Appeal. The order

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

La plus grande faveur que j'ai jamais vu un complice faire à l'un de ses compagnons a été de lui attribuer un rôle moins important dans l'opération et ainsi de le favoriser par rapport aux autres en lui faisant jouer un rôle plus passif.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

But friendship is not the bond which unites associates in crime; and the accomplice who avows his own guilt, will not feel much disposition to conceal that of his associate: at least he will not incur any risk on his account. In my experience I have ever found it so; the utmost favor that I have ever known an accomplice to show to any of his companions having been to assign to him a less prominent part in the transaction, and to make him comparatively better, by making him less active, than the others. These considerations have, with me at least, great weight; and therefore, though I by no means say the case is impossible, I will venture to assert that it much more rarely happens that an accomplice accuses an innocent man through malice, than that an unimpeachable witness accuses an innocent man through mistake.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Il allait sortir de son appartement lorsqu'il a entendu un véhicule s'arrêter devant l'immeuble. Il a vu un homme, qu'il a par la suite identifié comme l'appelant, entrer dans l'immeuble. L'homme a demandé à Jodoin de lui donner une bière.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

3.                On May 27, 1981, the complainant was attacked in his apartment at about 1: 00 a.m. He had been undergoing hormone treatment in preparation for what was described as a "sex‑change operation", and was dressed as, and had assumed the appearance of, a woman. He was planning to leave his apartment when he heard a motor vehicle stop in front of the building. He saw a man, whom he later identified as the appellant, enter the building. The man asked Jodoin for a beer. The complainant said he had no beer, but at the visitor's request he allowed entry to his apartment because the visitor wished to use the washroom. When in the apartment the visitor attacked the complainant. There was a struggle and a forced act of fellatio by the complainant. The assailant then left.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

L’inspecteur Boyd, qui a fixé l’heure de l’accident à minuit vingt très exactement, a dit qu’il était à peu près à la hauteur de la 78e rue quand il a vu un éclair devant lui. Cet éclair indiquait le lieu et le moment précis de la collision.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

Detective Boyd, who timed the accident very accurately at 12:20 a.m., said he was at approximately 78th Street when he noticed a flash of light ahead of him. That flash had indicated the point and time of the impact. The place of the impact was definitely determined to be midway between 76th Street and 75th Street, so that it occurred about two and a half blocks ahead of Detective Boyd. When he arrived at the scene of the accident which, of course, was only a moment after it occurred, Detective Boyd observed one person behind the wheel in an unconscious condition with

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Vers 14 h, le 12 avril, Jack Schultz, qui travaille à la station de traitement d’eau potable d’Arnprior, a vu un taxi qui roulait près de la rivière Madawaska et, quelques minutes plus tard, il a entendu un bruit d’éclaboussement.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

4 At about 2:00 p.m. on April 12, Jack Schultz, a worker at a water filtration plant in Arnprior, saw a taxicab driving near the Madawaska River, and several minutes later he heard a splash.  When he approached the riverbank he observed a car sinking into the water and saw the appellant standing nearby with a duffle bag and a bundle of white clothing.  Schultz called the police; they arrived some three minutes later.

  Cour suprême du Canada ...  

Show textShow cached sourceOpen source URL

Sur le palier supérieur de l’escalier, l’agent Ryan a dégrafé le pantalon de M. Golden, puis a tiré son pantalon et son caleçon long vers l’arrière. En regardant à l’intérieur du caleçon, il a vu un emballage de plastique transparent qui dépassait des fesses de l’appelant et une substance blanche à l’intérieur de cet emballage.

Compare text pagesCompare HTM pagesOpen source URLOpen target URLDefine scc.lexum.org as primary domain

30 Following the arrests, Constable Ryan conducted a “pat down” search of the appellant and looked in his pockets.  He did not find any weapons or narcotics. This officer then decided to conduct a visual inspection of the appellant’s underwear and buttocks.  Constable Ryan obtained from the shop’s employee the key to a door leading to the basement where public washrooms were located.  On the landing at the top of the stairwell, Constable Ryan undid Mr. Golden’s pants and pulled back the appellant’s pants and long underwear.  Looking inside the appellant’s underwear, he saw a clear plastic wrap protruding from between the appellant’s buttocks, as well as a white substance within the wrap.  Constable Ryan testified that when he tried to retrieve the plastic wrap, the appellant “hip-checked” and scratched him, so that he lost his balance and almost fell down the flight of 14 stairs.  Constable Ryan subsequently pushed the appellant into the stairwell, face-first.