Supreme Court Judgments

Decision Information

Decision Content





Citation: R. v. S.B., 2017 SCC 16, [2017] 1 S.C.R. 248

Appeal heard: March 21, 2017

Judgment rendered: March 21, 2017

Docket: 37042



Her Majesty The Queen











Coram: McLachlin C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner, Gascon and Côté JJ.


Reasons for Judgment:

(para. 1)

McLachlin C.J. (Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner, Gascon and Côté JJ. concurring)






R. v. S.B., 2017 SCC 16, [2017] 1 S.C.R. 248




Her Majesty The Queen                                                                                 Appellant


S.B.                                                                                                                Respondent




Indexed as: R. v. S.B.




2017 SCC 16




File No.: 37042.




2017: March 21.




Present: McLachlin C.J. and Abella, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner, Gascon and Côté JJ.




on appeal from the court of appeal for newfoundland and labrador


                    Criminal law — Appeals — Powers of Court of Appeal — Accused acquitted of several counts of assault and sexual assault by jury — Court of Appeal holding that trial judge erred in allowing cross-examination of complainant on prior sexual activity and in denying Crown applications to lead evidence to rebut allegations of recent fabrication — Majority of Court of Appeal finding that jury verdict should not be set aside despite trial judge’s errors — Dissenting judge finding that proper remedy is to set aside acquittals and order new trial — New trial ordered on all charges.




                    APPEAL from a judgment of the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal (Green C.J. and Rowe and White JJ.A.), 2016 NLCA 20, 30 C.R. (7th) 61, 377 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 84, 1173 A.P.R. 84, 336 C.C.C. (3d) 38, [2016] N.J. No. 158 (QL), 2016 CarswellNfld 183 (WL Can.), affirming the accused’s acquittals. Appeal allowed and new trial ordered.


                    Iain R. W. Hollett, for the appellant.


                    Rosellen Sullivan and Michael A. Crystal, for the respondent.


                    The judgment of the Court was delivered orally by


[1]               The Chief Justice — We would allow the appeal and order a new trial on all the charges, for the reasons of Chief Justice Green.


                    Judgment accordingly.


                    Solicitor for the appellant: Attorney General of Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John’s.


                    Solicitors for the respondent: Sullivan Breen King Defence, St. John’s; Spiteri & Ursulak, Ottawa.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.