29:
266:
272:
179:
George
Pappajohn put his house up for sale through a real-estate company. He met with a female real-estate agent from the company at a bar. They had lunch together, including drinks, over the course of approximately three hours, after which the two went to Pappajohn's house where they engaged in
200:
The majority opinion was written by
Justice McIntyre. He first discussed the question of when a defence should be put to a jury. He held that a defence should be used when there is "some evidence which would convey a sense of reality in the submission." On the facts, he found that there was no
183:
The agent claimed that she was raped. However, Pappajohn claims that short of a few coy objections she had consented. After the event the woman was seen running out of the house naked, wearing a bow-tie, with her hands bound, and was in great distress.
191:
should be put to the jury. Namely, whether
Pappajohn should be able to claim that he mistakenly believed that she had consented. The trial judge refused to allow the defence and Pappajohn was convicted.
218:
The federal government later amended the criminal offence to require that the jury should "consider the presence or absence of reasonable grounds for that belief." Sec 265(4).
201:
evidence, other than the statement of the accused, that if believed, would have allowed for the possibility of consent. Accordingly, the lower court ruling was upheld.
228:(generally indexed as Sansregret v. The Queen, 1 S.C.R. 570), where it excluded the defense of mistake of fact where the defendant is found to be "wilfully blind"
241:
315:
334:
204:
Justice
Dickson took a different approach to the defence of mistake of fact. He stated that the defence was derived from the
349:
339:
210:
requirement, which is a subjective standard, and consequently the mistaken belief did not need to be reasonable.
219:
308:
354:
229:
301:
117:
344:
164:
34:
101:
253:
8:
289:
60:
28:
225:
121:
188:
168:
93:
285:
97:
328:
113:
105:
220:
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/C-46/page-6.html#anchorbo-ga:l_VIII-gb:s_264_1
281:
265:
86:
109:
230:
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1985/1985scr1-570/1985scr1-570.htm
206:
136:
McIntyre J., joined by
Martland, Pigeon, Beetz and Chouinard JJ.
187:
During the trial the issue arose of whether the defence of
224:
The
Supreme Court itself clarified the law in the case of
242:
List of
Supreme Court of Canada cases (Laskin Court)
326:
309:
316:
302:
54:George Pappajohn v Her Majesty The Queen
195:
327:
259:
167:decision on the criminal defence of
13:
14:
366:
247:
270:
264:
27:
152:Dickson J., joined by Estey J.
1:
335:Supreme Court of Canada cases
174:
288:. You can help Knowledge by
213:
163:, 2 S.C.R. 120 is a famous
16:Supreme Court of Canada case
7:
235:
10:
371:
350:Canadian criminal case law
258:
73:Pappajohn appeal dismissed
43:Hearing: October 22, 1979
340:1980 in Canadian case law
148:
140:
132:
127:
82:
77:
69:
59:
49:
42:
26:
21:
254:full text at CanLII.org
165:Supreme Court of Canada
35:Supreme Court of Canada
45:Judgment: May 20, 1980
102:Louis-Philippe Pigeon
196:Opinion of the Court
180:sexual intercourse.
280:This article about
355:Canadian law stubs
297:
296:
156:
155:
362:
318:
311:
304:
276:
275:
274:
273:
268:
260:
226:R. v. Sansregret
122:Julien Chouinard
118:William McIntyre
91:Puisne Justices:
78:Court membership
31:
19:
18:
370:
369:
365:
364:
363:
361:
360:
359:
325:
324:
323:
322:
271:
269:
263:
250:
238:
216:
198:
189:mistake of fact
177:
169:mistake of fact
94:Ronald Martland
89:
44:
38:
17:
12:
11:
5:
368:
358:
357:
352:
347:
345:Rape in Canada
342:
337:
321:
320:
313:
306:
298:
295:
294:
277:
257:
256:
249:
248:External links
246:
245:
244:
237:
234:
215:
212:
197:
194:
176:
173:
154:
153:
150:
146:
145:
142:
138:
137:
134:
130:
129:
125:
124:
98:Roland Ritchie
84:Chief Justice:
80:
79:
75:
74:
71:
67:
66:
63:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
32:
24:
23:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
367:
356:
353:
351:
348:
346:
343:
341:
338:
336:
333:
332:
330:
319:
314:
312:
307:
305:
300:
299:
293:
291:
287:
283:
278:
267:
262:
261:
255:
252:
251:
243:
240:
239:
233:
231:
227:
222:
221:
211:
209:
208:
202:
193:
190:
185:
181:
172:
170:
166:
162:
161:
160:Pappajohn v R
151:
147:
143:
139:
135:
131:
128:Reasons given
126:
123:
119:
115:
114:Willard Estey
111:
107:
106:Brian Dickson
103:
99:
95:
92:
88:
85:
81:
76:
72:
68:
64:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
36:
30:
25:
22:Pappajohn v R
20:
290:expanding it
282:Canadian law
279:
223:
217:
205:
203:
199:
186:
182:
178:
159:
158:
157:
90:
83:
65:2 S.C.R. 120
53:
33:
144:Martland J.
141:Concurrence
87:Bora Laskin
329:Categories
175:Background
110:Jean Beetz
214:Aftermath
61:Citations
236:See also
207:mens rea
133:Majority
149:Dissent
70:Ruling
284:is a
286:stub
331::
232:.
171:.
120:,
116:,
112:,
108:,
104:,
100:,
96:,
317:e
310:t
303:v
292:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
.svg){kind=small}