R. v. Vaillancourt
Encyclopedia
R. v. Vaillancourt, [1987] 2 S.C.R. 636, 1987 SCC 78, is a landmark case from the Supreme Court of Canada
on the constitutionality of criminal code offence of "constructive murder". The Court ruled that crimes with significant "stigma" attached, such as culpable homicide
and constructive murder, require proof of the mens rea
element of objective foresight of death.
Vaillancourt was charged with culpable homicide under s. 213(d) (now repealed) of the Criminal Code of Canada
because he was considered an accomplice by operation under s.21(2) of the Code. Under s.213(d), a person using a weapon resulting in death while committing a robbery was guilty of murder
, regardless of whether they intended to cause death or knew that death was likely to occur.
The issue before the court was whether s.213(d) violated either s.7
or s.11(d) of the Charter
.
Vaillancourt argued that it was a principle of fundamental justice
that no accused should be liable for an offence without showing some degree of subjective mens rea
.
The Court looked at the elements of the offence as well as the punishment that accompanies it. Punishment for murder was an automatic life sentence which produced a "stigma" upon the offender. The moral blameworthiness of the accused must be proportional to the punishment, thus there must be proof beyond a reasonable doubt
of subjective foresight. However, for the case at hand there cannot be a conviction without proof of objective foresight.
The Court modified Vaillancourt's argument to recognize that the provision did not even require an objective fault element, which the Court recognized to be a principle of fundamental justice. Thus, since s.213(d) did not require any foresight of death it was in violation of a principle of fundamental justice and so violated s.7 of the Charter, and could not be saved under s.1
.
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 the constitutionality of criminal code offence of "constructive murder". The Court ruled that crimes with significant "stigma" attached, such as culpable homicide
Culpable homicide
Culpable homicide is a specific offence in various jurisdictions within the Commonwealth of Nations which involves the illegal killing of a person either with or without an intention to kill depending upon how a particular jurisdiction has defined the offence...
and constructive murder, require proof of the mens rea
Mens rea
Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind". In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty...
element of objective foresight of death.
Background
Yvan Vaillancourt and a friend planned to rob a local pool hall. Before the robbery they had agreed to only use knives. However, when his friend showed up for the robbery with a gun Vaillancourt made him take the bullets out and place them in his glove. Immediately after the robbery took place, Vaillancourt saw his friend go back into the hall where a fight broke out between his friend and a customer. In the struggle, the customer was shot with his friend's gun and later died of his wounds. Vaillancourt was caught by the police at the scene but his accomplice got away.Vaillancourt was charged with culpable homicide under s. 213(d) (now repealed) of the Criminal Code of Canada
Criminal Code of Canada
The Criminal Code or Code criminel is a law that codifies most criminal offences and procedures in Canada. Its official long title is "An Act respecting the criminal law"...
because he was considered an accomplice by operation under s.21(2) of the Code. Under s.213(d), a person using a weapon resulting in death while committing a robbery was guilty of murder
Murder
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...
, regardless of whether they intended to cause death or knew that death was likely to occur.
The issue before the court was whether s.213(d) violated either s.7
Section Seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Section Seven of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a constitutional provision that protects an individual's autonomy and personal legal rights from actions of the government in Canada. There are three types of protection within the section, namely the right to life, liberty, and...
or s.11(d) of the Charter
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a bill of rights entrenched in the Constitution of Canada. It forms the first part of the Constitution Act, 1982...
.
Vaillancourt argued that it was a principle of fundamental justice
Fundamental justice
Fundamental justice is a legal term that signifies a dynamic concept of fairness underlying the administration of justice and its operation, whereas principles of fundamental justice are specific legal principles that command "significant societal consensus" as "fundamental to the way in which the...
that no accused should be liable for an offence without showing some degree of subjective mens rea
Mens rea
Mens rea is Latin for "guilty mind". In criminal law, it is viewed as one of the necessary elements of a crime. The standard common law test of criminal liability is usually expressed in the Latin phrase, actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea, which means "the act does not make a person guilty...
.
Reasoning of the Court
The majority was written by Lamer J. with Dickson, Estey, and Wilson JJ. concurring.The Court looked at the elements of the offence as well as the punishment that accompanies it. Punishment for murder was an automatic life sentence which produced a "stigma" upon the offender. The moral blameworthiness of the accused must be proportional to the punishment, thus there must be proof beyond a reasonable doubt
Beyond a Reasonable Doubt
Beyond a Reasonable Doubt is a 1956 film directed by Fritz Lang and written by Douglas Morrow. The film, considered film noir, was the last American film directed by Lang.-Plot:...
of subjective foresight. However, for the case at hand there cannot be a conviction without proof of objective foresight.
The Court modified Vaillancourt's argument to recognize that the provision did not even require an objective fault element, which the Court recognized to be a principle of fundamental justice. Thus, since s.213(d) did not require any foresight of death it was in violation of a principle of fundamental justice and so violated s.7 of the Charter, and could not be saved under s.1
Section One of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Section One of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the section of the Charter that confirms that the rights listed in that document are guaranteed. The section is also known as the reasonable limits clause or limitations clause, as it legally allows the government to limit an...
.