What is the test for relevancy?

Relevancy is an illusive concept. Madame Justice L’Heureux-Dub said in Regina v. Seaboyer 1991 CanLII 76 (SCC), [1991] 2 S.C.R. 577 at p. 586: Whatever the test, be it one of experience, common sense or logic, it is a decision particularly vulnerable to the application of private beliefs. Regardless of the definition used, the content of any relevancy decision will be filled by the particular judge’s experience, common sense and/or logic. For the most part, there will general agreement as to that which is relevant and the determination will not be problematic. However, there are certain areas of inquiry where experience, common sense or logic are informed by stereotype and myth. As I have made clear, this area of the law has been particulary prone to the utilization of stereotype in determinations of relevance and again, as was demonstrated earlier, this appears to be the unfortunate concomitant of a society which to a large measure, holds these beliefs. It would also appear that recognition of the large role that stereotype may play in such determinations has had surprisingly little impact in this area of the law.