CASE: R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103

LOCATION:

Text, pg. 85

CASE RELATES TO:

Charter Section 1 – guarantee of rights and freedoms

Section 11 – presumption of innocence

Narcotic Control Act: Section 8 - Possession

FACTS OF THE CASE:

Def. was charged with possession of marijuana, and was required by the law to prove that he was not in possession. This was a reverse onus clause.

HELD:

The court ruled that the law was unconstitutional and the conviction was overturned.

REASON:

Court ruled that “reverse onus clauses” are unconstitutional : You are innocent until proven guilty

It is the government’s job to prove your guilt, not your job to prove your innocence.

The limit imposed by the law was not reasonable under s.1 of the charter.

This is a landmark case.

The courts established the following rules to determine a “reasonable limit”:

1. the reason must be shown to be important enough to override a protected right

2. the limit must be reasonable and logically relates to the objective of the law

3. the right or freedom must be limited as little as possible

4. the more severe the limit, the more important the objective must be