The Main Categories of Law Key Terms:

1. The Main Categories of LawKey Terms: • Plaintiff- the person who claims to have suffered and wants to go to court • Defendant- the person who defends himself/herself against accusations of wrongdoing • Accusation- to claim someone broke a law or did something wrong • Crown- lawyers called prosecutors who represent the government/ people in criminal cases • Criminal Code of Canada- code (book) containing criminal laws for all of Canada, may be amended Indictable offenses - serious criminal offenses Summary offenses- less serious criminal offenses

2. The Rule of Law • Basic principle is that “no one is above the law and everyone is subject to it.” This means that we are governed by a fixed set of laws that apply to all people equally, regardless of their position in society. • The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada. It prevents governments from abusing their authority.

3. The Main Categories of Law Civil Law • a. Deals with relationships between individuals or groups • b. Usually involves disputes over contracts, property, or personal relationships. • c. Property can be physical (possessions), intellectual (ideas), or creative (artwork). • d. Examples of civil suits – neighbours disagreeing over property damage, accident victims seeking compensation for injuries, or child custody in a divorce case • e. The person who claims to have suffered harm, loss, or injury to self or property is called the plaintiff. He or she sues the alleged wrong- doer, called the defendant.

4. Criminal Law • Is a public matter to do with issues that affect everyone e.g. theft, murder • It is used when specific laws have alleged to have been broken • The Crown (i.e. the Government) prosecutes on behalf of the public • The police are always involved

5. Types of Criminal Offences There are Indictable offences (serious crime like theft). These are more serious offences and include theft over $5,000, break and enter, aggravated sexual assault and murder. Maximum penalties for indictable offences vary and include life in prison. Some indictable offences have minimum penalties. • Depending on the offence, you could receive a penalty as high as life in a correctional centre. • For most indictable offences, you will have a choice (called election) to have atrial with a Provincial Court judge, a B.C. Supreme Court judge alone or B.C. Supreme Court judge with a jury. • Some trials are held only in specific courts. For instance, trials for some indictable offences are always held in Provincial Court. For these offences, you do not have a choice. For other indictable offences, such as first-degree murder, you must have a trial with a B.C. Supreme Court judge and jury.

6. There are summary conviction offences (less serious crime like driving offences or public order e.g. drunk and disorderly).The maximum penalty for a summary offence is usually a $5,000 fine and/or six months in jail. Some summary offences have higher maximum sentences. • Trials are held before a judge in the Provincial Court. • Police cannot take your fingerprints. • As an adult, you may apply to receive a record suspension three years after you complete your sentence. Hybrid offences- These are offences that can be dealt with as either summary or indictable. Crown counsel makes the decision about how the offence will be handled. How the Crown decides or elects to treat the offence generally depends on how serious the offence is. More info here: http://www.justicebc.ca/en/cjis/you/accused/understanding_charges/types_of_offences.html

7. HOW CRIMINAL LAW WORKS • Less serious cases are heard in a Magistrates Court • More serious cases are heard in a Crown Court • In a Magistrates Court the case is heard by either one full-time magistrate or a panel of three part-time magistrates • In the Crown Court the case is heard by a judge and jury • The Crown Court can impose much tougher sentences than the Magistrates Court • The accused is presumed innocent until proved guilty

8. Cases: Civil or Criminal Law? MacDonald vs. MacIntyre: A dispute over who wrote a song and who had a right to the proceeds of the song.  Intellectual property rights are disputed between individuals = civil law. R. vs. Wilson: Let’s say you don’t know what the case is about. Yet, the name gives away the type of Law involved. Criminal cases are carried out in the name of the Crown, so “R” will always be included. “R” stands for Regina, the Latin name for QUEEN. -Criminal cases are tried in the name of the Crown because breaking a criminal law is considered to be a wrongdoing against Canadian society. -The Prosecution acts on behalf of government to represent Canadian society

9. Regina vs Julia Campagna • The three basic elements of criminal law: 1. Presumption of Innocence 2. The Criminal Act 3. Mens Rea Which of the three do you think led to the controversy in this case? Explain.

10. Common Law vs Statutory Law • Canada’s criminal and civil law originate from English common and statutory law • Common Law is based on tradition: past decisions of judges. It first came into existence before written records. • Statutory Law is written law that is passed through Canada’s Parliament.

11. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms

12. The Canadian Bill of Rights

13. After the Bill of Rights A revision of Canadian Bill of Rights • Protects human rights • Prime Minister John Diefenbaker passed the Canadian Bill of Rights in 1960. • However as an act of Parliament, the bill could be changed like any other piece of legislation. It was not entrenched in the Constitution. • could be overruled by federal/provincial laws • Limited in its recognition of citizens’ rights (especially minorities)

14. The Charter is Introduced • Human rights weren’t solidly entrenched into our legal system until 1982, when Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau patriated the Constitution and created the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. • The Charter protects fundamental freedoms of Candians and guarantees democratic, legal, equality and language rights • Under the Charter, Canadians can challenge any law they believe is against human rights.

15. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms

16. Enforcement -if your rights have been infringed upon, you can take the issue to court. -if the legal system has infringed on your legal rights, you have the right to apply to have that evidence, and possibly your case dismissed

17. Habeas Corpus • The person that is assumed to be guilty is brought before a judge to determine whether there is enough evidence for a trial. If there isn’t, you can be released.

18. Some people opposed the Charter… • Some argue it restricts police in carrying out its duties effectively: the powers of police to arrest, question and conduct searches has been reduced since intro of Charter • “innocent until proven guilty”->many still believed in following the legal traditions of Britain through the unwritten Constitution • Believe that the Charter isn’t flexible enough

19. TRANSLATION -Native peoples have special rights and the Charter is not to take away from these rights, but to add to them.

21. General Interpret these! 26. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada. 27. This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians. 28. Notwithstanding anything in this Charter, the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.

22. General TRANSLATION: -the Charter is not denying other rights exist by law -it is meant to help preserve multiculturalism -rights are for both genders

23. The Notwithstanding Clause • Section 33 of the charter that gives the federal Parliament or provincial legislature an escape clause; it allows them to exempt part sof the Charter when necessary • This clause allows government to pass a law, even if it violates a specific freedom or right guaranteed in the Charter. • In 1976, the Parti Quebecois, passed Bill 101 (aka “Charter of French Language”). • Basically made French the only language allowed in Quebec. Quebec used the notwithstanding clause to override a 1989 Supreme Court decision that declared Bill 101 unconstitutional • has to be reviewed every 5 years

24. Reasonable Limits • Section 1 of the Charter contains this limiting clause. • The government can limit a person’s rights or freedoms, but it must show that the limit is necessary. • In 1990 when James Keegstra, an Alberta high-school teacher, was charged with promoting hatred by making anti-Semitic statements in his classes. • Keegstra argued that the Charter protected his right to express his opinion, but the Supreme Court ruled that his teachings went beyond his right to freedom of expression

25. Reasonable Limits • “FREEDOM OF SPEECH DOES NOT GIVE A PERSON THE RIGHT TO SHOUT, “FIRE” IN A CROWDED THEATRE” Discussion: Is this correct? What do you think?