R v Mills
R v Mills, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 668 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court upheld the newly enacted rape shield law when challenged as a violation to section 7 and 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The rape shield law was the second of its type, the first having been struck down in R. v. Seaboyer. Accordingly, this case is often cited as an example of judicial dialogue.
Wikipage disambiguates
Wikipage redirect
primaryTopic
R v Mills
R v Mills, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 668 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision where the Court upheld the newly enacted rape shield law when challenged as a violation to section 7 and 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The rape shield law was the second of its type, the first having been struck down in R. v. Seaboyer. Accordingly, this case is often cited as an example of judicial dialogue.
has abstract
R v Mills, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 668 ...... example of judicial dialogue.
@en
Wikipage page ID
Wikipage revision ID
743,489,654
case-name
citations
[1999] 3 S.C.R. 668
Concurrence/Dissent
decided-date
1992-11-25
Docket
heard-date
1992-01-19
JoinMajority
L’Heureux-Dubé, Gonthier, Major, Bastarache and Binnie JJ.
majority
McLachlin and Iacobucci JJ.
subject
hypernym
type
comment
R v Mills, [1999] 3 S.C.R. 668 ...... example of judicial dialogue.
@en
label
R v Mills
@en