In Lucier v. The Queen, the Supreme Court of Canada unanimously held that a declaration against penal interest is inadmissible when that declaration is inculpatory of the accused. Although correct, the decision cannot be sup-ported on the basis of the Court's reasoning. The Court failed to discharge its duty to give good reasons for its decisions, a duty of particular importance fora court of final appeal. This comment explores the reasoning that the Supreme Court could have provided in Lucier, and uses the case to illustrate a more widespread shortcoming in the Court's approach to its appellate functions.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.
"Lucier v. the Queen."
Osgoode Hall Law Journal