Azoulay v. The Queen
Encyclopedia
| Azoulay v. The Queen | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Supreme Court of Canada |
||||||||
| Decided November 4, 1952 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
| Holding | ||||||||
| In this case, the trial judge failed to adequately summarize the evidence to a jury. | ||||||||
| Court membership | ||||||||
|
||||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||||
|
Azoulay v. The Queen, [1952] 2 S.C.R. 495 was a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada
Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeals in the Canadian justice system. The court grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts, and its decisions...
on abortion in Canada
Abortion in Canada
Abortion in Canada is not limited by the law . While some non-legal obstacles exist, Canada is one of only a few nations with no legal restrictions on abortion. Regulations and accessibility vary between provinces....
. The Court found that with evidence so complicated, a judge should summarize it to a jury.
Background
Dr. Leon Azoulay was accused of murderMurder
Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human being, and generally this state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide...
after one of his patients died. This woman, described by Justice Estey as "Mrs. P.", had allegedly received an abortion
Abortion
Abortion is defined as the termination of pregnancy by the removal or expulsion from the uterus of a fetus or embryo prior to viability. An abortion can occur spontaneously, in which case it is usually called a miscarriage, or it can be purposely induced...
from Dr. Azoulay which wound up causing a fatal haemorrhage. An autopsy
Autopsy
An autopsy—also known as a post-mortem examination, necropsy , autopsia cadaverum, or obduction—is a highly specialized surgical procedure that consists of a thorough examination of a corpse to determine the cause and manner of death and to evaluate any disease or injury that may be present...
revealed evidence of an abortion.
At trial, the judge spoke about the law under which Dr. Azoulay was charged, and told the jury
Jury
A jury is a sworn body of people convened to render an impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment. Modern juries tend to be found in courts to ascertain the guilt, or lack thereof, in a crime. In Anglophone jurisdictions, the verdict may be guilty,...
that if they found Dr. Azoulay guilty, there must be evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. He also declined to summarize the facts of the case, saying that they "have been well elaborated by the Defence and the Crown." Dr. Azoulay was found guilty of manslaughter
Manslaughter
Manslaughter is a legal term for the killing of a human being, in a manner considered by law as less culpable than murder. The distinction between murder and manslaughter is said to have first been made by the Ancient Athenian lawmaker Dracon in the 7th century BC.The law generally differentiates...
. Quebec
Quebec
Quebec or is a province in east-central Canada. It is the only Canadian province with a predominantly French-speaking population and the only one whose sole official language is French at the provincial level....
's court of appeal upheld the conviction, albeit with the Chief Justice dissenting that the trial judge's discussion with the jury was inadequate.
Decision
The Supreme Court overturned the trial. Justice Taschereau wrote an opinion saying he could imagine that there was sufficient evidence to convict Dr. Azoulay. However, he agreed with the dissenting Chief Justice in the lower court that the trial judge "failed to instruct properly the jury, in omitting to review the evidence." Taschereau pointed to Spencer v. Alaska Parkers (1905) to say precedent had been established that judges should help guide the jury in giving "value and effect" to certain pieces of evidence. Thus, needless details were not discarded, and the jury was "left in a state of confusion."Justice Estey, in his opinion, wrote that the evidence in this case was "technical and somewhat involved," and that made it all the more necessary that a judge should help summarize the facts and distinguish important evidence from needless details. In particular, he found that the defence arguments were not adequately presented.
Dissent
Two dissents were written by Justices Rand and Fauteax. Rand wrote that the defence was not actually complex, and the facts were generally accepted. For a judge to summarize the defence's arguments would have been redundant after a simple point had been repeated and explored many times.Justice Fauteux wrote that if the trial judge had summarized the expert testimony, this would work against rather than favour the defence's case.
See also
- List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Richards Court through Fauteux Court)
- Morgentaler v. The QueenMorgentaler v. The QueenMorgentaler v. The Queen, [1976] 1 S.C.R. 616 is a famous decision of the Supreme Court of Canada where Henry Morgentaler unsuccessfully challenged the prohibition of abortion in Canada under the Criminal Code. The Court found the abortion law was appropriately passed by Parliament under the laws...
- R. v. MorgentalerR. v. MorgentalerR. v. Morgentaler [1988] 1 S.C.R. 30 was a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada wherein the abortion provision in the Criminal Code of Canada was found to be unconstitutional, as it violated a woman's right under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to "security of person"...
- Tremblay v. DaigleTremblay v. DaigleTremblay v. Daigle [1989] 2 S.C.R. 530, was a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in which it was found that a fetus has no legal status in Canada as a person, either in Canadian common law or in Quebec civil law...
- R. v. Morgentaler (1993)R. v. Morgentaler (1993)R. v. Morgentaler [1993] 3 S.C.R. 463, was a decision by the Supreme Court of Canada invalidating a provincial attempt to regulate abortions in Canada. This followed the 1988 decision R. v. Morgentaler, which had struck down the federal abortion law as a breach of section 7 of the Canadian Charter...