Simon's Megalomaniacal Legal Resources

(Ontario/Canada)

EVIDENCE | ADMINISTRATIVE LAW | SPPA / Fairness (Administrative)
SMALL CLAIMS / CIVIL LITIGATION / CIVIL APPEALS / JUDICIAL REVIEW / Something Big

Home / About / Democracy, Law and Duty / Testimonials / Conditions of Use

Civil and Administrative
Litigation Opinions
for Self-Reppers


TOPICS

(What's a Topic?)


Criminal - Reasons for Decision (2)

. R v. K.L.

In R v. K.L. (Ont CA, 2026) the Ontario Court of Appeal considers the adequacy of reasons for decision, here in a criminal context:
[21] Ultimately, the court is to take a functional and contextual approach in reviewing a trial judge’s reasons: R. v. G.F., 2021 SCC 20, [2021] 1 S.C.R. 801, at para. 69. The Supreme Court has instructed that appellate courts are not to “finely parse” trial decisions searching for errors; rather, “they must assess whether the reasons, read in context and as a whole, in light of the live issues at trial, explain what the trial judge decided and why they decided that way in a manner that permits effective appellate review”: G.F., at para. 69. Reviewing the trial judge’s reasons in this light discloses no error.



CC0

The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.




Last modified: 30-04-26
By: admin