R v U (FJ), the Glossary

Table of Contents

1. 6 relations: Cross-examination, Oath, Plaintiff, Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements, R v B (KG), Supreme Court of Canada.

2. 1995 in Canadian case law
3. Canadian evidence case law

Cross-examination

In law, cross-examination is the interrogation of a witness by one's opponent.

See R v U (FJ) and Cross-examination

Oath

Traditionally an oath (from Anglo-Saxon āþ, also called plight) is either a statement of fact or a promise taken by a sacrality as a sign of verity.

See R v U (FJ) and Oath

Plaintiff

A plaintiff (Π in legal shorthand) is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an action) before a court.

See R v U (FJ) and Plaintiff

Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements

Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements, in the law of evidence, occur where a witness, testifying at trial, makes a statement that is either consistent or inconsistent, respectively, with a previous statement given at an earlier time such as during a discovery, interview, or interrogation.

See R v U (FJ) and Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements

R v B (KG)

R v B (KG), 1 SCR 740, popularly known as the KGB case, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the admissibility of prior inconsistent statements as proof of the truth of their contents. R v U (FJ) and r v B (KG) are Canadian evidence case law and Supreme Court of Canada cases.

See R v U (FJ) and R v B (KG)

Supreme Court of Canada

The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC; Cour suprême du Canada, CSC) is the highest court in the judicial system of Canada.

See R v U (FJ) and Supreme Court of Canada

See also

1995 in Canadian case law

• 1995 reasons of the Supreme Court of Canada
• Canadian Broadcasting Corp v Canada (Labour Relations Board)
• Egan v Canada
• Hill v Church of Scientology of Toronto
• Miron v Trudel
• R (Canada) v Adams
• R v Burlingham
• R v Hibbert
• R v Jorgensen
• R v O'Connor
• R v Park
• R v U (FJ)
• RJR-MacDonald Inc v Canada (AG)
• Stewart v Pettie
• Thibaudeau v Canada
• Weber v Ontario Hydro

Canadian evidence case law

• Cinar Corp v Robinson
• Descôteaux v Mierzwinski
• Graat v R
• R v B (KG)
• R v Béland
• R v Gruenke
• R v Handy
• R v Hebert
• R v Henry
• R v Khan
• R v Khelawon
• R v Laba
• R v Lavallee
• R v Lifchus
• R v M (MR)
• R v Manninen
• R v Marquard
• R v Mills
• R v Mohan
• R v Noble
• R v O'Connor
• R v Oickle
• R v Rodgers
• R v Seaboyer
• R v Smith (1992)
• R v Starr
• R v Stillman
• R v Stinchcombe
• R v Strachan
• R v Turcotte
• R v U (FJ)
• R v W (D)
• R v Wray
• R. v Broyles
• Solosky v R
• Vetrovec v R

References

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_U_(FJ)

Also known as R. v. U. (F.J.).