R. v. Oakes
Canada Supreme Court
[1986] 1 S.C.R. 103 (1986)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
Section 8 of the Canadian Narcotic Control Act created a presumption that a defendant possessed marijuana for the purposes of trafficking unless the defendant proved the possession was not for the purpose of trafficking. Section 8 also provided that if the defendant did not challenge the presumption of possession with the intent to traffic marijuana, the court must convict the defendant for trafficking. The Canadian government (plaintiff) prosecuted Oakes (defendant) under the Narcotic Control Act for possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking marijuana. The trial court only convicted Oakes of unlawful possession of marijuana. Oakes filed an appeal, challenging the constitutionality of Section 8. The Ontario Court of Appeal held Section 8 forced the burden of proof onto Oakes as a defendant, violating the presumption of innocence guaranteed under Section 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (charter). The Canadian government appealed to the Canadian Supreme Court. The Canadian government argued that even if Section 8 of the Narcotic Control Act violated Section 11(d) of the charter, Section 1 of the charter upholds the law.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Dickson, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.
