The Re-emergence of a Clash of Rights: A Critical Analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada’s Decision in R. v. S. (N.)
This paper is a case comment on the Supreme Court of Canada’s 2012 decision in R. v. S. (N.). The authors place this decision within the Supreme Court’s “conflict of rights” jurisprudence and provide an overview of this case law, using Justice Iacobucci’s articulation of “reconciling rights” as a framework. Ultimately, the authors argue that, contrary to the Supreme Court’s statements in the decision, S.(N.) is not an example of reconciling rights (as that term is understood according to Justice Iacobucci’s articulation of it) and that ultimately one right was preferred over another. The authors also point out several of the practical implications of the decision, namely, how the decision will likely lead to increased procedural burdens for witnesses, that it requires courts to consider the strength of a witness’s subjective religious beliefs and the issues that it will cause regarding access to justice.
Agarwal, Ranjan K. and Carlo, Carlo Di.
"The Re-emergence of a Clash of Rights: A Critical Analysis of the Supreme Court of Canada’s Decision in R. v. S. (N.)."
The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode’s Annual Constitutional Cases Conference
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.