To support us, please follow us wherever you're listening and visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠our website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to provide feedback.

Criminal law — Trial — Amicus curiae

(0:00:09) Reasons for Judgment: Karakatsanis J. (Wagner C.J. and Côté, Rowe, Martin, Kasirer and Jamal JJ. concurring)
(0:00:13) I. Overview – 1
(0:03:08) II. Background – 6
(0:05:43) A. Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta (Poelman J.) – 13
(0:11:37) B. Court of Appeal of Alberta, 2022 ABCA 12, 39 Alta. L.R. (7th) 12 (McDonald, O’Ferrall and Khullar JJ.A.) – 23
(0:14:31) III. Analysis – 29
(0:18:37) A. Inherent Jurisdiction to Appoint Amicus to Ensure Trial Fairness – 35
(0:22:18) B. Limitations on the Scope of Roles for Amicus – 40
(0:22:22) (1) Role as Friend of the Court – 40
(0:24:05) (2) Rights of the Accused – 43
(0:28:10) (3) Other Limitations – 48
(0:30:06) C. Discretion to Appoint Amicus with Adversarial Functions – 50
(0:30:26) (1) When the Assistance of Amicus May Be Required – 51
(0:37:42) (2) Considerations in Determining the Scope of the Role of Amicus – 59
(0:40:55) D. Summary and Best Practices – 64
(0:43:19) IV. Application – 67
(0:45:20) A. A Miscarriage of Justice Did Not Arise – 71