R. v. Généreux
Canada Supreme Court
[1992] 1. S.C.R. 259 (1992)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Canadian Corporal Michel Généreux (defendant) was tried by a court-martial for possessing narcotics and being absent without leave, and he was convicted. The system used for Généreux’s court-martial convened a temporary court-martial for each case. The judge advocate general was an official appointed by the executive branch. In turn, the judge advocate general selected and appointed the specific judge advocate who presided over each court-martial. Judge advocates were selected on a case-by-case basis, and a single judge advocate could preside over multiple courts-martial. While a trial was underway, a judge advocate could be removed from the case only if the judge advocate was unable to attend. Généreux appealed, arguing that a court-martial under this system was not an independent and impartial tribunal as guaranteed in section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. After Généreux’s trial, Canada changed its court-martial system to appoint military trial judges for two- to four-year terms and to have a chief military trial judge select which judge would preside over a specific court-martial.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lamer, C.J.)
Dissent (L’Heureux-Dubé, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.