About: R v JA

Facets (new session)
Description
Metadata
Settings
- Rule:
- Inverse Functional Properties:
- "Same As":

About: R v JA Goto Sponge NotDistinct Permalink

An Entity of Type : yago:Transgression100745005, within Data Space : dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon

http://dbpedia.demo.openlinksw.com/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FR_v_JA&invfp=IFP_OFF&sas=SAME_AS_OFF

R v JA 2011 SCC 28 is a criminal law decision of the Supreme Court of Canada regarding consent in cases of sexual assaults. The court found that a person can only consent to sexual activity if they are conscious throughout that activity. If a person becomes unconscious during the sexual activity, then they legally cannot consent, whether or not they consented earlier. In addition to the two parties (J.A. and the Attorney General of Ontario), the Court heard from two interveners: the Attorney General of Canada and the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF).

Attributes	Values
rdf:type	yago:WikicatSexCrimesInCanada yago:Abstraction100002137 yago:Act100030358 yago:Activity100407535 yago:Crime100766234 yago:Event100029378 yago:PsychologicalFeature100023100 yago:Wrongdoing100732746 yago:YagoPermanentlyLocatedEntity Supreme Court of the United States case yago:SexualAssault100774107 yago:StatutoryOffense100774796 yago:Transgression100745005
rdfs:label	R. c. J.A. (fr) R v JA (en)
rdfs:comment	R. c. J.A. est un arrêt de principe de 2011 de la Cour suprême du Canada concernant le consentement dans les affaires d'agression sexuelle et notamment lorsque la victime devient inconsciente. (fr) R v JA 2011 SCC 28 is a criminal law decision of the Supreme Court of Canada regarding consent in cases of sexual assaults. The court found that a person can only consent to sexual activity if they are conscious throughout that activity. If a person becomes unconscious during the sexual activity, then they legally cannot consent, whether or not they consented earlier. In addition to the two parties (J.A. and the Attorney General of Ontario), the Court heard from two interveners: the Attorney General of Canada and the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF). (en)
dcterms:subject	Sex crimes in Canada 2011 in Canadian case law Canadian criminal case law Supreme Court of Canada cases
Wikipage page ID	31908111 (xsd:integer)
Wikipage revision ID	1104654838 (xsd:integer)
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage	Epilepsy Beverley McLachlin University of Ottawa University of Toronto Police Criminal law of Canada Sex crimes in Canada Erotic asphyxiation R v Jobidon R v Ewanchuk Morris Fish Consent (criminal law) Criminal Code (Canada) 2011 in Canadian case law Toronto Star Alcohol intoxication Canadian criminal case law Parliament of Canada Women's Legal Education and Action Fund Unconsciousness List of Supreme Court of Canada cases Probation Attorney General of Canada Attorney General of Ontario Court of Appeal for Ontario Assault Supreme Court of Canada cases Supreme Court of Canada Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Sexual assault Rosie DiManno Spouse
Link from a Wikipage to an external page	https://web.archive.org/web/20120226203714/http:/scc.lexum.org/en/2011/2011scc28/2011scc28.html
sameAs	R v JA R v JA R v JA R v JA R v JA
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate	dbt:Short_description dbt:Cite_CanLII dbt:SCCInfoBox
Dissent	Fish (en)
docket	33684 (xsd:integer)
JoinDissent	Binnie and LeBel (en)
JoinMajority	Deschamps, Abella, Charron, Rothstein, and Cromwell (en)
citations	2011 (xsd:integer)
history	Judgment for the defendant in the Court of Appeal for Ontario (en)
majority	McLachlin (en)
ratio	A person can only legally consent to sexual activity if they have an operating mind during the sexual activity in question. Therefore, performing sexual activity on an unconscious person is a criminal offence – whether or not the unconscious person consented in advance. (en)
has abstract	R. c. J.A. est un arrêt de principe de 2011 de la Cour suprême du Canada concernant le consentement dans les affaires d'agression sexuelle et notamment lorsque la victime devient inconsciente. (fr) R v JA 2011 SCC 28 is a criminal law decision of the Supreme Court of Canada regarding consent in cases of sexual assaults. The court found that a person can only consent to sexual activity if they are conscious throughout that activity. If a person becomes unconscious during the sexual activity, then they legally cannot consent, whether or not they consented earlier. In addition to the two parties (J.A. and the Attorney General of Ontario), the Court heard from two interveners: the Attorney General of Canada and the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF). (en)
case-name	R v JA (en)
decided-date	2011-05-27 (xsd:date)
full-case-name	Her Majesty The Queen v JA (en)
heard-date	2010-11-08 (xsd:date)
ruling	Appeal allowed and conviction entered (en)
SCC	2008 (xsd:integer)
gold:hypernym	Decision
prov:wasDerivedFrom	wikipedia-en:R_v_JA?oldid=1104654838&ns=0
page length (characters) of wiki page	9327 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf	wikipedia-en:R_v_JA
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage of	R v Ewanchuk 2011 reasons of the Supreme Court of Canada 42nd Canadian Parliament Sexual consent List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (McLachlin Court) Reasons of the Supreme Court of Canada by Justice Fish R. v. J.A.
is Wikipage redirect of	R. v. J.A.
is foaf:primaryTopic of	wikipedia-en:R_v_JA

Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024

Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE Content Formats:

RDF

ODATA

Microdata

About

OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 67 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software