Search results
On July 8, 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada released R v Jordan, 2016 SCC 27 [Jordan], a decision that fundamentally changed the framework that determines whether an accused has been tried within a reasonable time under s 11(b) of the Charter. While the impact of explicitly overthrowing a well-established framework with years of precedent remains to be seen, it is clear that this decision has ...
R. v. Jordan [2] was a decision of the Supreme Court of Canada which rejected the framework traditionally used to determine whether an accused was tried within a reasonable time under section 11(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and replaced it with a presumptive ceiling of 18 months between the charges and the trial in a provincial court without preliminary inquiry, or 30 ...
Apr 2, 2024 · The decision rendered by the Supreme Court in R. v. Jordan3 marks a significant change as compared to the prior law. Indeed, in this decision (numbering 303 paragraphs), the majority judges discarded the framework established in Morin, noting the unforeseeability of its application, the inconsistencies in the treatment of the concept of ...
Jordan begins with a declaration by the Supreme Court that the old framework for assessing s 11(b) violations, established in R v Morin, [1992] 1 SCR 771 [Morin], suffered from doctrinal and practical problems that have led to a culture of delay and complacency in the courts. It is for these reasons that the Supreme Court decided to replace the previous contextual analysis with a hard-line ...
Jun 20, 2017 · The Supreme Court unanimously agreed that Mr. Jordan’s charges should be dismissed, with the majority introducing new timelines for determining what is unreasonable delay. The new framework introduces time limits by which criminal trials should be complete or have an expected date of completion: 18 months for trials in provincial court or 30 ...
Mar 20, 2020 · In July 2016, the Supreme Court of Canada decided an important appeal, R. v. Jordan. Jordan set out rules to decide how long is too long for a criminal trial. It said that most trials should finish either 18 or 30 months after a person is charged, depending on the type of trial. Jordan tells judges to “presume” (accept as true) that ...
People also ask
What did the Supreme Court decide in R v jordan3?
What R v Jordan changed Jordan?
What are the positives and negatives of Jordan's Supreme Court decision?
Why did the Jordan decision change the criminal justice system?
How has the Jordan decision changed assessing delay to trial?
Will the court system be able to accelerate R v Jordan cases?
The decision rendered by the Supreme Court in R. v. Jordan 3 marks a significant change as compared to the prior law. Indeed, in this decision (numbering 303 paragraphs), the majority judges discarded the framework established in Morin, noting the unforeseeability of its application, the inconsistencies in the treatment of the concept of
