R v CJ

"...simply because it does not agree with it, it raises some unease or concern, or it may be a mistake (see R v CJ, 2019 SCC 8, adopting 2018 MBCA 65 at paras 67-68; and Sinclair at para 53). This is particularly the case when the interpretation of evidence is based on a credibility assessment,..."

"...that goes to the very core of the outcome of the case (see R v CJ, 2019 SCC 8, adopting the dissenting reasons of Pfuetzner JA in R v CJ, 2018 MBCA 65 at para 72 (not in dissent on this point); and Lantin et al v Seven Oaks General Hospital, 2018 MBCA 57 at para [55] The accused argues that..."

"...simply because it does not agree with it, it raises some unease or concern, or it may be a mistake (see R v CJ, 2019 SCC 8, adopting 2018 MBCA 65 at paras 67-68; and Sinclair at para 53). This is particularly the case when the interpretation of evidence is based on a credibility assessment,..."

"...at 221. See also: R v Haque, 2022 SKCA 124 at para 110; R v Thalheimer, 2022 SKCA 25 at para 45, 411 CCC (3d) 208; and R v CJ, 2018 MBCA 65 at paras 21–28, 362 CCC (3d) 137). In Lohrer, Binnie J. added that this is “a stringent standard”, that ȁ..."

"...simply because it does not agree with it, it raises some unease or concern, or it may be a mistake (see R v CJ, 2019 SCC 8, adopting 2018 MBCA 65 at paras 67-68; and Sinclair at para 53). This is particularly the case when the interpretation of evidence is based on a credibility assessment,..."

"...simply because it does not agree with it, it raises some unease or concern, or it may be a mistake (see R v CJ, 2019 SCC 8, adopting 2018 MBCA 65 at paras 67-68; and Sinclair at para 53). This is particularly the case when the interpretation of evidence is based on a credibility assessment,..."

"...that goes to the very core of the outcome of the case (see R v CJ, 2019 SCC 8, adopting the dissenting reasons of Pfuetzner JA in R v CJ, 2018 MBCA 65 at para 72 (not in dissent on this point); and Lantin et al v Seven Oaks General Hospital, 2018 MBCA 57 at para [55] The accused argues that..."

"...simply because it does not agree with it, it raises some unease or concern, or it may be a mistake (see R v CJ, 2019 SCC 8, adopting 2018 MBCA 65 at paras 67-68; and Sinclair at para 53). This is particularly the case when the interpretation of evidence is based on a credibility assessment,..."

"...at 221. See also: R v Haque, 2022 SKCA 124 at para 110; R v Thalheimer, 2022 SKCA 25 at para 45, 411 CCC (3d) 208; and R v CJ, 2018 MBCA 65 at paras 21–28, 362 CCC (3d) 137). In Lohrer, Binnie J. added that this is “a stringent standard”, that ȁ..."

"...simply because it does not agree with it, it raises some unease or concern, or it may be a mistake (see R v CJ, 2019 SCC 8, adopting 2018 MBCA 65 at paras 67-68; and Sinclair at para 53). This is particularly the case when the interpretation of evidence is based on a credibility assessment,..."