z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Personal Stare Decisis, HIV Non-Disclosure, and the Decision in Mabior
Author(s) -
Elaine Craig
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
alberta law review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1925-8356
pISSN - 0002-4821
DOI - 10.29173/alr285
Subject(s) - concurrence , doctrine , economic justice , law , political science , concurring opinion , judicial opinion , dissenting opinion , majority opinion , supreme court , court of record , original jurisdiction , physics , quantum mechanics , quantum entanglement , quantum
This article discusses the concept of personal stare decisis and the issue of horizontal precedent through examination of Canada's jurisprudence on the (over) criminalization of HIV non-disclosure. The Court's reasoning in R v Cuerrier and R v Mabior, as well as the trial decisions decided since Mabior are examined.The point is not to suggest that Justice McLachlin’s approach in Cuerrier offered the perfect solution to this issue. Indeed, as Isabel Grant argues, a better approach would remove non-disclosure of HIV status from the sexual assault criminal law regime and in its stead reintroduce the use of offences such as nuisance and criminal negligence. Rather, the point is to suggest that what Chief Justice McLachlin did in Mabior was to uphold a deeply problematic legal regime and in the process overturn herself, without explanation, on nearly every single principled objection to this regime that she had previously made.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom