Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The meaning of seizure is fairly straightforward. In R. v. Dyment (1988), [17] the Supreme Court defined it simply as the "taking of a thing from a person by a public authority without that person's consent." This meaning has been narrowed to cover property taken in furtherance of administration or criminal investigation (Quebec (Attorney ...
Similar fact evidence rule R v Hall [2002] 3 S.C.R. 309, 2002 SCC 64 October 10, 2002 Bail, section 11(e) Sauvé v Canada (Chief Electoral Officer) [2002] 3 S.C.R. 519, 2002 SCC 68 October 31, 2002 Right to vote for prisoners Harvard College v Canada (Commissioner of Patents) [2002] 4 S.C.R. 45, 2002 SCC 76 December 5, 2002
Dareton police search the vehicle of a suspected drug smuggler in Wentworth, in the state of New South Wales, Australia, near the border with Victoria.. Search and seizure is a procedure used in many civil law and common law legal systems by which police or other authorities and their agents, who, suspecting that a crime has been committed, commence a search of a person's property and ...
The Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures extends to the length of a seizure, a federal court ruled last week, significantly restricting how long law enforcement ...
The Supreme Court of Canada, in Celanese Canada Inc. v. Murray Demolition Corp. [18] established guidelines for Anton Piller orders. The orders are meant to protect evidence from being destroyed, not to gain litigious advantage, and should only be issued if:
Distraint is the act or process "whereby a person (the distrainor), traditionally even without prior court approval, seizes the personal property of another located upon the distrainor's land in satisfaction of a claim, as a pledge for performance of a duty, or in reparation of an injury."
In rem jurisdiction was thus supported by the assumption that the owner of that property, having a concrete economic interest in the property, had a duty to look after the affairs of their property, and would be notified of the pending case by such seizure. In rem jurisdiction was limited to deciding issues regarding the specific property in ...
R v M (MR), [1998] 3 SCR 393 is a leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada on search and seizure by teachers and principals in Canadian schools (not colleges or universities). In this case, a student's section 8 rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (" Charter ") were not violated by being searched by a school ...