R v O'Connor

R v O'Connor, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 411 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on disclosure of medical records. O’Connor was accused of and charged with rape and indecent assault of four women.[1] The Court held that the medical and counselling records of a complainant in a sexual assault case that are held by a third party can be disclosed by order of the judge if they meet two requirements.

R v O'Connor
Hearing: 1995: February 1;
Judgment: 1995: December 14.
Citations[1995] 4 SCR 411
Docket No.24114
Prior historyAPPEAL from the COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
RulingAppeal dismissed
Court membership
Reasons given
MajorityLa Forest, L'Heureux-Dube, Gonthier and McLachlin JJ.
ConcurrenceCory and Iacobucci JJ
DissentLamer C.J. and Sopinka and Major JJ.

First, the applicant must establish, without seeing them, that the records are likely to be relevant to the case. Second, the judge must review the records and decide whether to disclose them based on the balancing the right to make full answer and defence, and the right to privacy.

The O'Connor involved in the case was Hubert Patrick O'Connor, a Catholic bishop from British Columbia who was found guilty of sex crimes in 1991.[2]

See also

References
  1. http://www.westcoastleaf.org/our-work/r-v-oconnor-1995/
  2. Disgraced B.C. bishop dead of heart attack
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.