This is a list of all the reasons written by Louise Arbour during her tenure as puisne justice of the Supreme Court of Canada. During her time on the Court she wrote 68 reasons.
Case name | Issue | Co-authored by | Joined by | |
---|---|---|---|---|
R v Pelletier [1999] 3 SCR 863 | Common Bawdy-house | None | McLachlin, Major and Arbour JJ. | |
|
Case name | Issue | Co-authored by | Joined by | |
---|---|---|---|---|
R v Biniaris [2000] 1 SCR 381; 2000 SCC 15 | ||||
R v Molodowic [2000] 1 SCR 420; 2000 SCC 16 | ||||
R v AG [2000] 1 SCR 439; 2000 SCC 17 | ||||
R v Wust [2000] 1 SCR 455; 2000 SCC 18 | ||||
R v Arthurs [2000] 1 SCR 481; 2000 SCC 19 | ||||
R v Arrance [2000] 1 SCR 488; 2000 SCC 20 | ||||
R v Oickle [2000] 2 SCR 3; 2000 SCC 38 | ||||
R v Morrisey [2000] 2 SCR 90; 2000 SCC 39 | ||||
R v Lévesque [2000] 2 SCR 487; 2000 SCC 47 | ||||
Winnipeg Child and Family Services v KLW [2000] 2 SCR 519; 2000 SCC 48 | ||||
R v Charlebois [2000] 2 SCR 674; 2000 SCC 53 | ||||
R v Knoblauch [2000] 2 SCR 780; 2000 SCC 58 | ||||
|
Case name | Issue | Co-authored by | Joined by | |
---|---|---|---|---|
o | R v Guttman [2001] 1 SCR 363; 2001 SCC 8 | |||
United States of America v Kwok [2001] 1 SCR 532; 2001 SCC 18 | ||||
United States of America v Cobb [2001] 1 SCR 587; 2001 SCC 19 | ||||
United States of America v Tsioubris [2001] 1 SCR 613; 2001 SCC 20 | ||||
United States of America v Shulman [2001] 1 SCR 616; 2001 SCC 21 | ||||
R v Pan; R v Sawyer [2001] 2 SCR 344; 2001 SCC 42 | ||||
Ivanhoe inc v United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 500 [2001] 2 SCR 565; 2001 SCC 47 | ||||
Sept-Îles (City) v Quebec (Labour Court) [2001] 2 SCR 670; 2001 SCC 48 | ||||
R v Rhee [2001] 3 SCR 364; 2001 SCC 71 | ||||
R v Nette [2001] 3 SCR. 488; 2001 SCC 78 | ||||
R v Golden [2001] 3 SCR 679; 2001 SCC 83 | ||||
R v Khan [2001] 3 SCR 823; 2001 SCC 86 | ||||
|
Case name | Issue | Co-authored by | Joined by | |
---|---|---|---|---|
o | R v Benji [2002] 1 SCR 142; 2002 SCC 5 | |||
Moreau-Bérubé v New Brunswick (Judicial Council) [2002] 1 SCR 249; 2002 SCC 11 | ||||
R v Fliss [2002] 1 SCR 535; 2002 SCC 16 | ||||
Lavoie v Canada [2002] 1 SCR 769; 2002 SCC 23 | ||||
R v Lamy [2002] 1 SCR 860; 2002 SCC 25 | ||||
R v Cinous [2002] 2 SCR 3; 2002 SCC 29 | ||||
R v Brown [2002] 2 S.C.R. 185; 2002 SCC 32 | ||||
o | R v Carlos [2002] 2 SCR 411; 2002 SCC 35 | |||
Gronnerud (Litigation Guardians of) v Gronnerud Estate [2002] 2 SCR 417; 2002 SCC 38 | ||||
R v Hibbert [2002] 2 SCR 445; 2002 SCC 39 [ permanent dead link ] | ||||
R v Burke [2002] 2 SCR 857; 2002 SCC 55 | ||||
Lavallee, Rackel & Heintz v Canada (AG); White, Ottenheimer & Baker v Canada (AG); R v Fink [2002] 3 SCR 209; 2002 SCC 61 | ||||
R v Noël [2002] 3 SCR 433; 2002 SCC 67 [ permanent dead link ] | ||||
Ruby v Canada (Solicitor General) [2002] 4 SCR 3; 2002 SCC 75 | ||||
Gosselin v Québec (AG) [2002] 4 SCR 429; 2002 SCC 84 | ||||
|
Case name | Issue | Co-authored by | Joined by | |
---|---|---|---|---|
o | R v Feeley [2003] 1 SCR 64; 2003 SCC 7 | |||
o | R v Knight; R v Hay [2003] 1 SCR 156; 2003 SCC 15 | |||
R v Arradi [2003] 1 SCR 280; 2003 SCC 23 | ||||
Miglin v Miglin [2003] 1 SCR 303; 2003 SCC 24 | Bastarache J. | |||
R v Buhay [2003] 1 SCR 631; 2003 SCC 30 | ||||
R v Owen [2003] 1 SCR 779; 2003 SCC 33 | ||||
Wewaykum Indian Band v Canada [2003] 2 SCR 259; 2003 SCC 45 | ||||
R v Johnson [2003] 2 SCR 357; 2003 SCC 46 | ||||
R v Edgar [2003] 2 SCR 388; 2003 SCC 47 | ||||
R v Smith [2003] 2 SCR 392; 2003 SCC 48 | ||||
R v Mitchell [2003] 2 SCR 396; 2003 SCC 49 | ||||
R v Kelly [2003] 2 SCR 400; 2003 SCC 50 | ||||
KLB v British Columbia [2003] 2 SCR 403; 2003 SCC 51 | ||||
EDG v Hammer [2003] 2 SCR 459; 2003 SCC 52 | ||||
MB v British Columbia [2003] 2 SCR 477; 2003 SCC 53 | ||||
R v SAB [2003] 2 SCR 678; 2003 SCC 60 | ||||
Doucet-Boudreau v Nova Scotia (Minister of Education) [2003] 3 SCR 3; 2003 SCC 62 | Iacobucci J. | McLachlin C.J., Gonthier and Bastarache JJ. | ||
Toronto (City) v Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 79 [2003] 3 SCR 77; 2003 SCC 63 | ||||
Ontario v Ontario Public Sector Employees Union [2003] 3 SCR 149; 2003 SCC 64 | ||||
o | Vann Niagara Ltd v Oakville (Town) [2003] 3 SCR 158; 2003 SCC 65 [ permanent dead link ] | |||
R v Malmo-Levine; R v Caine [2003] 3 SCR 571; 2003 SCC 74 | ||||
R v Clay [2003] 3 S.C.R. 735; 2003 SCC 75 | ||||
|
Case name | Issue | Co-authored by | Joined by | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v Canada (AG) [2004] 1 SCR 76; 2004 SCC 4 | ||||
Transport North American Express Inc v New Solutions Financial Corp [2004] 1 SCR 249; 2004 SCC 7 | ||||
Hamilton v Open Window Bakery Ltd [2004] 1 SCR 303; 2004 SCC 9 | ||||
Monsanto Canada Inc v Schmeiser [2004] 1 SCR 902; 2004 SCC 34 | ||||
Application under s 83.28 of the Criminal Code (Re) [2004] 2 S.C.R. 248; 2004 SCC 42 | Iacobucci J. | |||
Vancouver Sun (Re) [2004] 2 SCR 332; 2004 SCC 43 | Iacobucci J. | |||
The insanity defense, also known as the mental disorder defense, is an affirmative defense by excuse in a criminal case, arguing that the defendant is not responsible for their actions due to a psychiatric disease at the time of the criminal act. This is contrasted with an excuse of provocation, in which the defendant is responsible, but the responsibility is lessened due to a temporary mental state. It is also contrasted with the justification of self defense or with the mitigation of imperfect self-defense. The insanity defense is also contrasted with a finding that a defendant cannot stand trial in a criminal case because a mental disease prevents them from effectively assisting counsel, from a civil finding in trusts and estates where a will is nullified because it was made when a mental disorder prevented a testator from recognizing the natural objects of their bounty, and from involuntary civil commitment to a mental institution, when anyone is found to be gravely disabled or to be a danger to themself or to others.
Catherine de' Medici was an Italian (Florentine) noblewoman born into the Medici family. She was Queen of France from 1547 to 1559 by marriage to King Henry II and the mother of French kings Francis II, Charles IX, and Henry III. The years during which her sons reigned have been called "the age of Catherine de' Medici" since she had extensive, if at times varying, influence on the political life of France.
The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court in the judicial system of Canada. It comprises nine justices, whose decisions are the ultimate application of Canadian law, and grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts. The Supreme Court is bijural, hearing cases from two major legal traditions and bilingual, hearing cases in both official languages of Canada.
Sophia of Nassau, also Sofia, was Queen of Sweden and Norway as the wife of King Oscar II. She was Queen of Sweden for 35 years, longer than anyone before her, and the longest-serving queen until 2011, when she was surpassed by Queen Silvia. She is also the most recent woman to have been officially Dowager Queen of Sweden.
Maria Karolina Zofia Felicja Leszczyńska, also known as Marie Leczinska, was Queen of France as the wife of King Louis XV from their marriage on 4 September 1725 until her death in 1768. The daughter of Stanislaus I Leszczyński, the deposed King of Poland, and Catherine Opalińska, her 42-years and 9 months service was the longest of any queen in French history. A devout Catholic throughout her life, Marie was popular among the French people for her numerous charitable works and introduced many Polish customs to the royal court at Versailles. She was the grandmother of the French kings Louis XVI, Louis XVIII and Charles X.
Claire L'Heureux-Dubé is a retired Canadian judge who served as a puisne justice on the Supreme Court of Canada from 1987 to 2002. She was the first woman from Quebec and the second woman appointed to this position, after Bertha Wilson. Previously, she had been one of the first woman lawyers to handle divorce cases, and was the first woman appointed as a judge to the Quebec Superior Court and the Quebec Court of Appeal.
Priscilla Richman is an American lawyer and jurist serving as the chief United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. She was previously a justice of the Supreme Court of Texas from 1995 to 2005.
Caroline Matilda of Great Britain was Queen of Denmark and Norway from 1766 to 1772 by marriage to King Christian VII.
Sonia Maria Sotomayor is an American lawyer and jurist who serves as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. She was nominated by President Barack Obama on May 26, 2009, and has served since August 8, 2009. She is the third woman, first nonwhite woman, the first Hispanic and the first Latina to serve on the Supreme Court.
Bowen v. Roy, 476 U.S. 693 (1986), was a United States Supreme Court case which ruled that a government program requiring the use of a social security number did not violate the first amendment.
Augusta of Great Britain was a British princess, granddaughter of George II and the only elder sibling of George III. She was Duchess of Brunswick-Lüneburg and Princess of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel by marriage to Charles William Ferdinand, Duke of Brunswick. Her daughter Caroline was the spouse of George IV.
The Supreme Court of Cassation is the highest court of appeal or court of last resort in Italy. It has its seat in the Palace of Justice, Rome.
Rankin v. McPherson, 483 U.S. 378 (1987), is a major decision of the Supreme Court of the United States concerning the First Amendment, specifically whether the protection of the First Amendment extends to government employees who make extremely critical remarks about the President. The Court ruled that, while direct threats on the President's life would not be protected speech, a comment — even an unpopular or seemingly extreme one — made on a matter of public interest and spoken by a government employee with no policymaking function and a job with little public interaction, would be protected.
The table below lists the reasons delivered from the bench by the Supreme Court of Canada during 2006. A total of 59 judgments were published. The table illustrates what reasons were filed by each justice in each case, and which justices joined each reason. This list, however, does not include reasons on motions.
Rice v. Collins, 546 U.S. 333 (2006), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States regarding a prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge to remove a young African American woman, Juror 16, from a defendant's drug trial jury in a California court case, based on her youth and on her alleged "eye rolling" in answer to a question. The defendant, Steven Martell Collins, challenged the striking of Juror 16, saying her exclusion was based on race, but the trial judge agreed that the prosecutor's reasons were race-neutral. The California Court of Appeal upheld the trial court's ruling, and the Federal District Court dismissed Collins' habeas corpus petition with prejudice. However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, stating that the dismissal was unreasonable based, among other reasons, on the lack of evidence that the eye rolling had occurred.
Amanda Marie Knox is an American author, activist, and journalist. She spent almost four years incarcerated in Italy after her wrongful conviction in the 2007 murder of Meredith Kercher, a fellow exchange student, with whom she shared an apartment in Perugia. In 2015, Knox was definitively acquitted by the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation. In 2024, an Italian appellate court upheld Amanda Knox's slander conviction for falsely accusing Patrick Lumumba of murdering Meredith Kercher.
Helene N. White is a senior United States circuit judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Previously, she was a judge on the Michigan Court of Appeals.
Christiane Völling is the first intersex person known to have successfully sued for damages in a case brought for non-consensual surgical intervention described as a non-consensual sex reassignment. She was awarded €100,000 by the Regional Court of Cologne.
Toyotomi Sadako was a Japanese noble woman from the Sengoku period and Edo period. She was a daughter of Toyotomi Hidekatsu and Oeyo. In 1609, she ascended to the status of Kita no Mandokoro. Due to being directly linked to prominent figures of her time, she was inducted into the Junior Third Rank of the Imperial Court (Jusanmi), one of the highest honors that could be conferred by the Emperor of Japan.