How have courts interpreted the confession rule?

Manitoba, Canada


The following excerpt is from R. v. Gallant, 1980 CanLII 3128 (MB QB):

17 The classic statement of the confession rule is that of Lord Sumner in Ibrahim v. The King, [1914] A.C. 599, at pages 609 and 610.: It has long been established as a positive rule of English criminal law, that no statement by an accused is admissible in evidence against him unless it is shown by the prosecution to have been a voluntary statement, in the sense that it has not been obtained from him either by fear or prejudice or hope of advant age exercised or held out by a person in authority.

Other Questions


What is the test for interpreting the Queen's interpretation of the Queen’s Speech to the Court of Appeal? (Manitoba, Canada)
How has the Court interpreted the concept of "unreasonable search" under s. 8 of the Fourth Amendment? (Manitoba, Canada)
Is the indoor management rule an agency rule? (Manitoba, Canada)
How have courts interpreted the principle of "the law of the law" in the context of Inland Revenue Com'rs? (Manitoba, Canada)
In what circumstances will the courts interpret legislation on public access to the records of recounts and scrutinies? (Manitoba, Canada)
What is the nature of an accused's confession and what is the substance of that confession? (Manitoba, Canada)
How have courts interpreted a heading in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms? (Manitoba, Canada)
How have courts interpreted section 24 (1) and 24 (2) of the Charter regarding the provision of state-funded counsel? (Manitoba, Canada)
Does the Human Rights Appeal Court have concurrent jurisdiction with the Court of Appeal in a collective agreement dispute? (Manitoba, Canada)
How have the courts interpreted the meaning of an inchoate or incomplete agreement between a buyer and seller? (Manitoba, Canada)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.