This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
This article includes a list of references, related reading, or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please help improve this article by introducing more precise citations.(January 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed.(January 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
(Learn how and when to remove this message)
R v Oakes
Supreme Court of Canada
Hearing: March 12, 1985 Judgment: February 28, 1986
Judgment for defendant in the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Ruling
Appeal dismissed.
Holding
Section 8 of the Narcotic Control Act violates the right to presumption of innocence under Section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and cannot be saved under Section 1 of the Charter.
Court membership
Chief Justice: Brian Dickson Puisne Justices: Jean Beetz, Willard Estey, William McIntyre, Julien Chouinard, Antonio Lamer, Bertha Wilson, Gerald Le Dain, Gérard La Forest
Reasons given
Majority
Dickson CJ (paras 1–81), joined by Chouinard, Lamer, Wilson and Le Dain JJ
Concurrence
Estey J (para 82), joined by McIntyre J
Beetz and La Forest JJ took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
R v Oakes [1986] 1 SCR 103 is a Supreme Court of Canada decision that established the legal test for whether a government action infringing a right under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is justified. David Oakes challenged the validity of provisions under the Narcotic Control Act that provided a person found in possession of a narcotic, absent of evidence to the contrary, must be convicted of trafficking the narcotic. Oakes contented the presumption of trafficking violated the presumption of innocence guarantee under Section 11(d) of the Charter.
The Supreme Court established the Oakes test as an analysis of the limitations clause (Section 1) of the Charter that allows reasonable limitations on rights and freedoms through legislation if the limitation is motivated by a "pressing and substantial objective" and can be "demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society."[c 1]
^SCC Case Information - Docket 17550 Supreme Court of Canada
Cite error: There are <ref group=c> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=c}} template (see the help page).
RvOakes [1986] 1 SCR 103 is a Supreme Court of Canada decision that established the legal test for whether a government action infringing a right under...
and freedoms are justifiable R. v. Oakes, a 1986 decision of the Supreme Court of Canada that established the Oakes test Oaks (disambiguation) This disambiguation...
democratic society is known as the Oakes test, which takes its name from the essential case RvOakes [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103 which was written by Chief Justice...
role in developing the "Oakes test" in the later case RvOakes. SCC Case Information - Docket 18125 Supreme Court of Canada R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd....
Dickson in 1985. During his tenure as clerk, Dickson authored the judgment RvOakes, among others. Bakan then pursued a master's degree at Harvard Law School...
Rv Keegstra, [1990] 3 SCR 697 is a freedom of expression decision of the Supreme Court of Canada where the court upheld the Criminal Code provision prohibiting...
Charter, including the Oakes test (section 1), set out in the case RvOakes (1986); and the Law test (section 15), developed in Law v Canada (1999) which...
demonstrably justified, the objective was considered, in accordance with R. v. Oakes (1986). Objectives suggested by the Crown included prevention of harm...
the restriction could not be upheld under s. 1 of the Charter, as per R. v. Oakes. The issue started when a 12-year-old schoolboy dropped a 20 cm (8-inch)...
standard that can be applied by courts in future decisions), such as the Oakes test (in Canadian law) or the Bolam test (in English law). Sometimes, with...
Murphy v CPR, 1958 CanLII 1 at p. 642, [1958] SCR 626 (7 October 1958), Supreme Court (Canada) Granholm v. Heald, 544 U.S. 460 (2005) RvOakes, 1986 CanLII...
Rv Chaulk, [1990] 3 SCR 1303 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on the interpretation and constitutionality of section 16(4) of the...
of the Narcotics Control Act in the decision of R. v. Oakes. The Supreme Court in the decision of R. v. Laba (1994) struck down section 394(1) of the Criminal...
Rv Morales, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 711, is a case decided by the Supreme Court of Canada. The Court found that the "public interest" basis for pre-trial detention...
2023-06-02. "R. v. Oakes - SCC Cases". scc-csc.lexum.com. Retrieved 2023-06-02. Tuns, Paul (2010-08-06). "Religious freedom in the wake of R. v. Big M. Drug...
For example, Smith v Jones would be pronounced "Smith and Jones". Criminal cases are pronounced with against. For example, Rv Smith would be pronounced...
UKHL 1 (23 May 1935)". Retrieved 6 May 2014. "R v Oakes (1986) SCC 200". Retrieved 6 May 2014. "S v Bhulwana (1995) 2 SACR 748". Retrieved 6 May 2014...
decisions was that of RvOakes, where he proposed the analytical framework for section 1 of the Charter now known as the "Oakes test". In Rv Big M Drug Mart...
Kath (2006). "Oak poisoning in cattle". UK Vet Livestock. 11 (5): 47–50. doi:10.1111/j.2044-3870.2006.tb00047.x. Smith, S.; Naylor, R. J.; Knowles, E...
Alberta v Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony, 2009 SCC 37, [2009] 2 SCR 567 is a freedom of religion decision by the Supreme Court of Canada. The court...
clauses as violating the presumption of innocence. This first occurred in R. v. Oakes (1986) in respect to the Narcotics Control Act. This was also the case...
Charter. The determination of s. 1 validity follows the Oakes test first expressed in RvOakes, which follows four parts, of which the last three have...
DLR (4th) 385. R vOakes (1986) 26 DLR (4th) 200. S v Benetti 1975 (3) SA 603 (T). S v Chirara; S v Hwengwa and Others; S v Pisaunga; S v Muzondiwa and Others...
general student body. College Seven was renamed Oakes in 1975 after philanthropists Roscoe and Margaret Oakes, whose endowment contributed significantly to...
determine the application of section 1, the Court used the test as set out by RvOakes (1986). Everyone agreed that fighting crime would be an important objective...
Global Information
