Codification

Question 1

Frey v Fedoruk

Answer 1

Facts: Peeping tom arrested for BOKP

Held: P wins. Can’t find an act criminal which have not up to that point been held to be criminal.
Reasons:
- Criminal law should be a matter of precedent, not of applying a generic principle case by case.
- People need to know what the code is and know when they break it
- To do otherwise would lead to great uncertainty, individual discretion of a judge

Question 2

R v Amato

Answer 2

Facts: Police informer A sets up drug bust buying cocaine from D. D originally refuses, then sells small amount. After repeated calls from A, D agrees to sells more. D sells to undercover cop B (first charge). B pressures further purchase through fear B will suffer violence. D sells again to B (second charge). D charged with drug trafficking, D claims entrapment.

Held: Common law defences are valid within the Criminal Code.
Reasons:
- Ties into principles of fundamental justice (innocent until proven guilty)

Question 3

R v Thornton

Answer 3

Facts: D donated blood to Red Cross for transfusion. He knew he had HIV and knew of its ways of transmission prior to donating. The Red Cross detected the HIV blood and put it aside.

Held: P wins. Legal duty can be found from common law or statute. D breached common law duty, donating HIV+ blood was reasonably foreseeable to cause serious harm. D’s defense of no endangerment rejected.