Articles

Should adult criminal courts consider the best interests of an offender's dependent children when making sentencing decisions? Could the application of this principle reduce, or even eliminate, a custodial sentence where one might otherwise be entirely appropriate?

Lauren Warner summarizes the recent case of R. v. M.B., 2016 ONCA 760, in which the Ontario Court of Appeal has reminded us that a youth court judge has discretion to determine whether and how much credit to give a youth for pre-sentence custody, especially where considering imposing an adult sentence.

Access to the court records of children and young persons who interact with the criminal or civil justice systems is tightly controlled. For example, youth records created for the purposes of a criminal investigation or prosecution are protected by a strict and comprehensive set of provisions found in Part VI of the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

The OBA’s Child & Youth Law Section hosted two very important programs on child protection issues in May. A summary of these great presentations is provided.

On April 29, 2016, the coroner’s jury released its verdict and recommendations in the inquest into the death of Katelynn Sampson. The jury made a total of 173 recommendations touching upon the work of a wide range of actors who work with and for children.

On February 3, 2016, the OBA Child and Youth Law Section and the Constitutional, Civil Liberties and Human Rights Law Section co-hosted a much-anticipated and well-attended event for OBA Institute: “Constitutional and Human Rights of Young People: Policing and Public Space.”

What is the difference between "secure" and "open" custody in youth criminal justice proceedings?

Child Refugees and Migrants: the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Kanthasamy v Canada, 2015 SCC 61

Should courts apply a different standard when assessing the necessary mens rea – or criminal intent – to ground a finding of guilt when the defendant is a young person?