Key words:  criminal law, bibliography on the defence of necessity, compulsion of circumstances, defence of necessity, necessity, Regina v. Dudley and Stephens, R. v. Perka, notstand, excuse, justification.   Mots clés: nécessité, état de nécessité, l'état de nécessité comme moyen de défense, l'état de nécessité comme justification, l'état de nécessité comme excuse.

[Home -- Accueil]
[Main Page -- Criminal Law / Page principale -- droit pénal]

updated to / mise à jour au: 25 June 2011

- To assist researchers, please do not hesitate to suggest titles to these bibliographies.  Thank you.
- Pour le bénéfice de tous, n'hésitez pas à suggérer des ajouts aux bibliographies.  Merci.
flareau@rogers.com
 

par / by ©François Lareau, 1998-, Ottawa, Canada

Selected Bibliography on the
Defence of Necessity in Criminal Law /

Bibliographie choisie sur l'état de
nécessité en droit pénal

------
See also / Voir aussi: Comparative Law / Droit comparé
------

I-- Canadian Law / Droit canadien

A- Books / Livres etc.

ABELL, J. (Jennie), 1951-,  and Elizabeth Sheehy, Criminal Law and Procedure: Proof, Defences, and Beyond, 2nd ed., North York (Ontario): Captus Press, c.1998, vii, 463 p., ISBN: 6896691374, see Chapter 17, "Necessity", pp. 369-388;
 

ANDERSON, Ellen, 1951-,  Judging Bertha Wilson : law as large as life, Toronto : Published for The Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History by University of Toronto Press, c2001, xxii, 472 p., [33] p. (series; Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History series), ISBN: 0802036481; copy at Ottawa University, FTX General, KE 8248 .W54 A54 2001;  Mrs Justice Wilson wrote one of the judgment in the case of  Perka v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 232; on Perka, see pp. 279-280 and 432-433, note 16;
 

BARNHORST, Sherrie,1948-, and Richard Barnhorst, 1947-, Criminal Law and the Canadian Criminal Code, 3rd ed., Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson, 1996, xxxii, 414 p., see necessity at p. 80,  ISBN: 007552757X
 

BOWERS, Andrew Alexander, 1968-, Duress, necessity and the taking of innocent life: special challenges facing English, Canadian and international criminal law, LL.M. thesis, Queen's University (Kingston, Ontario, Canada), 2003, thesis supervisor: A. Manson; title noted in my research on 6 February 2004 but not consulted yet;

"[Abstract] This thesis engages in a legal and moral debate about whether duress and necessity can ever constitute a           valid defence to a crime involving the intentional taking of innocent life. The relationship between duress and necessity is discussed and the scope of these defences is initially analyzed in the context of English and Canadian law. Special problems associated with the application of the 'proportionality principle' are highlighted and refinements upon G. W. Fletcher's        doctrine of 'normative involuntariness', specifically in the Canadian cases of R. v. Perka and R. v. Ruzic, are explored as a means to offer a new bifurcated approach to duress and necessity. While the first branch of the bifurcated approach focuses upon normative involuntariness as a means of eliminating the proportionality principle, the second contains a more traditional, although modified, common law test. The potential utility of the bifurcated approach is then prospectively tested in the context of international law, specifically under the Rome Statute of the newly created International Criminal Court. The facts of the     Prosecutor v. Drazen Erdemovic´ decision handed down by the International Tribunal of the Former Yugoslavia in 1997 most significantly inform this section of the discussion. The thesis concludes with the presentation of a hypothetical situation in order to further emphasize how the bifurcated approach may help resolve the issues that linger in both international and domestic law when actors rely on the defences of duress and necessity after having intentionally taken innocent life." (source: AMICUS catalogue, Library and Archives Canada)

BUJOLD, Michel-Wilbrod, Le lynchage constitutionnel de la famille Latimer,  [Montréal] : M.-W. Bujold, 2005. 173 p. ; copie 'a la Biblioth'eque de la Cour supr{eme du Camada, KF3827 E87 B85 2005; note: ""Une édition de 21 million de Canadiens";


BURBIDGE, George Wheelock, A Digest of the Criminal Law of Canada (Crimes and Punishments) Founded By Permission on Sir James Fitzjames Stephen's Digest of the Criminal Law, Toronto: Carswell, 1890. lxii, 588 p; Research Note: see article 32 "Necessity" wiith illustrations at pp. 36-38;
 

CAIRNS-WAY, Rosemary, 1956-,  and Renate Mohr, Toni Pickard and Phil Goldman: Dimensions of Criminal Law, 2nd ed., Toronto: Emond Montgomery, 1996, xxvi, 999 p., ISBN: 0920722822, see ";
 

CAIRNS-WAY, Rosemary, 1956-, Dimensions of Criminal Law -- Toni Pickard, Phil Goldman, Renate M. Mohr, 3rd ed., Toronto: Emond Montgomery Publications, 2002, xxvi, 1004 p., see Necessity Doctrine: Legal Images in the Service of Class Power" at pp. 957-1004, ISBN: 155239050; copy at Ottawa University, location: FTX general, KE 8808.5 .P528 2002;

CANADA, Department of Justice Canada and James W. O'Reilly, Toward a New General Part of the Criminal Code of Canada - Details on Reform Options -, [Ottawa]: [Department of Justice Canada], [December 1994], ii, 50 p., see pp. 31-33; available at my Digital Library, http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; also published in French/aussi publié en français: Ministère de la Justice Canada et James W. O'Reilly, Pour une nouvelle codification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Canada - Options de réforme -, [Ottawa]: [Ministère de la Justice Canada], [décembre 1994], ii, 51 p., voir les pp. 31-33; disponible à ma bibliothèque digitale, http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html;
 

___________The Minister of Justice of Canada,  Proposals to Amend the Criminal Code (general principles), [Ottawa], [Department of Justice Canada], 28 June 1993, 17 p., see clause 36 on duress of circumstances and duress by threats at pp. 11-12; available at my Digital Library, http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; information in French (bilingual publication) /informations en français (publication bilingue): Ministre de la Justice du Canada, Proposition de modification du Code criminel (principes généraux), [Ottawa], [MInistère de la Justice Canada], 28 ¸juin 1993, 17 p., voir l'article 36 sur la contrainte et la menace aux pp. 11-12; disponible à ma bibliothèque digitale, http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html;

CANADA, House of Commons, Sub-Committee on the Recodification of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Sollicitor General, Report of the Sub-Committee on the Recodification of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Sollicitor General: First Principles: Recodifying the General Part of the Criminal Code of Canada, in Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Sub-Committee on the recodification of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General, [Ottawa]: Queen's Printer for Canada, 1993,  issue no. 11 of 10 December 1992 and  2, 4, and 16 February 1993, see  pp. 63, 72-73; also published in French/aussi publié en français: Canada, Chambre des Communes,  Sous-comité sur la Recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteur général, Principes de base: recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Canada.  Rapport du Sous-comité sur la recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Canada du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteur général dans Procès-verbaux et témoignages du Sous-comité sur la Recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteur général,  [Ottawa]: I'Imprimeur de la Reine pour le Canada, 1993,  fasicule 11 du 10 décembre 1992 et 2,4,16 février 1993, voir les pp. 67 et 76-77;
 

CANADA, Law Reform Commission of Canada, Criminal Law: The General Part: Liability and Defences, Ottawa: Law Reform Commission of Canada, 1982,  204 p. (Series; Working Paper, vol. 29),  see necessity at pp. 91-97 with notes at p. 136, ISBN: 0662514297; copy of the English version of this working paper is available in pdf format at my Digital Library -- Canadian Criminal Law; also published in French/aussi publié en français : Commission de réforme du droit du Canada,  Droit pénal: Partie générale - responsabilité et  moyens de défense, Ottawa: Ministère des Approvisionnements et Services Canada, 1982, 239 p. (Collection:  Document de travail, vol. 29),  voir les pp. 106-114 sur la nécessité et la p. 156 pour les notes, ISBN: 0662514297;
 

___________Medical Treatment and Criminal Law, Ottawa: Law Reform Commission of Canada, 1980, [viii], 136 p., see "necessity" at pp. 42-45 (series; working Paper - Protection of Life Project; number 26), ISBN: 0662506707; copy of the English version of this working paper is available in pdf format at my Digital Library -- Canadian Criminal Law; information on the French version/informations sur la version française, Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, Le traitement médical et le droit criminel, Ottawa: Comiision de réforme du droit du Canada, 1980, [ix], 152 p., voir "la défense de nécessité aux pp. 47-51 (Collection; Document de travail - Projet sur la protection de la vie; numéro 26), ISBN: 0662506707;
 

___________Recodifying Criminal Law (Revised and Enlarged Edition of Report 30), Ottawa: Law Reform Commission of Canada, 1987,  pp. 34 and 36 (series; Report, vol. 31), ISBN: 0662547578; copy of the English version of this working paper is available in pdf format at my Digital Library -- Canadian Criminal Law; also published in French/aussi publié en français: Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, Pour une nouvelle codification du droit pénal (Édition revisée et augmentée du rapport no 30), Ottawa: Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, 1987,  pp. 37-38 et 40 (Collection: Rapport, vol. 31), ISBN: 0662547578;
 

CANADA, Law Reform Commission of Saskatchewan, Proposals for Defences to Provincial Offences: Report to the Minister of Justice,  Saskatoon: Law Reform Commission of Saskatchewan, December 1986, 18 p., see pp. 13-15 on "Common Law Defences" where the defence of necessity is discussed briefly;
 

___________Tentative Proposals for Defences to Provincial Offences,  Saskatoon : Law Reform Commission of Saskatchewan, 1981,  ii, 113, iv p., see pp. 75-85 for a discussion of the defence of necessity,  ISSN: 0701-6948;
 

CANADA, Officials of the Department of Justice Canada and Members of the Law Reform Commission of Canada, ],  Toward a New General Part for the Criminal Code of Canada: A Framework Document on the Proposed New General Part of the Criminal Code for the Consideration of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General, [Ottawa]: [Department of Justice Canada], [1990], 137 p., see pp.  63-64 and 82-83;available at http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; also published in French/aussi publié en français: Fonctionnaires du Ministère de la Justice Canada et des membres de la Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, Pour une nouvelle codification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Canada : document cadre sur la nouvelle partie générale proposée du Code criminel présenté pour examen au comité permanent de la justice et du solliciteur général, [Ottawa]: [Ministère de la Justice], [1990], 144 p., voir les pp. 65-66 et 85-86; disponible à  http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; 


CANADA, Parliament, House of Commons, Bill C-338, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (procuring a miscarriage after twenty weeks of gestation), private member's bill by Mr. Steckle, first reading on 21 June 2006, available at http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/Bills_House_Private.asp?Language=E#C-338  (accessed on 27 June 2006); also available in French / aussi disponible en français: CANADA, Parlement, Chambre des communes, Projet de loi C-338, Loi modifiant le Code criminel (procurer un avortement après vingt semaines de gestation), projet de loi émanant d'un député par M. Steckle, première lecture, le 21 juin 2006, disponible à http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/private/C-338/C-338_1/C-338_cover-F.html (site visité le 27 juin 2006);

"Exception
    (4) Subsection (1) does not apply if the miscarriage is necessary

(a) to save the life of a woman whose life is endangered by a physical disorder, physical illness, or physical injury, including a physical condition caused by or arising from the pregnancy itself; or

(b) to prevent severe pathological physical morbidity of the woman."

______

"Exception
    (4) Le paragraphe (1) ne s’applique pas si l’avortement est nécessaire

a) soit pour sauver la femme dont la vie est mise en danger par un trouble, une maladie ou une blessure physiques, notamment un état physique causé par la gestation même ou quien découle;

b) soit pour prévenir une morbidité physique grave, de nature pathologique, de la femme."  


CANADA, Parliament, Senate, Standing Committee on Human Rights, Children: The Silenced Citizens: Effective Implementation of Canada's International Obligations with respect to the Rights of Children: Final report of the Senate Standing Committee on Human Rights, Ottawa, 2007, xxv, 296 p., and see the recommendation at p. 71; available at http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/huma-e/rep-e/rep10apr07-e.pdf (accessed on 28 April 2007); to understand this recommendation, see also the testimony of the witnesses before the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights, studying Bill S-207, on  4, 11, 18 and 19 June 2007, issue number 20, available at http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/huma-e/pdf/20issue.pdf; also published in French / aussi publié en français: CANADA, Parlement, Comié permanent des droits de la personne, Les enfants: des citoyens sans voix: mise en oeuvre efficace des obligations internationales du Canada relatives aux droits des enfants : rapport final du Comité sénatorial des Droits de la personne, Ottawa, 2007, xxv, 322 p., et voir la recommandation à la p. 79, disponible à http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-f/huma-f/rep-f/rep10apr07-f.pdf (site visité le 29 avril 2007); pour comprendre cette recommandation, voir les témoignages des témoins devant le Comité sénatorial permanent des Droits de la personne, étudiant S-207,  fascicule numéro pour les 4, 11, 18 et  19 juin 2007, disponible à  http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/huma-e/pdf/20issue.pdf;


CANADA/PROVINCES, Report of the Working Group on Chapter 3 of the Law Reform Commission of Canada Report 30, Vol. 1,  "Recodifying Criminal Law", [Ottawa]: [Department of Justice Canada], December 1987, vii, 80 p.; Research Note:  this report is cited in the Law Reform Commission of Canada, 1988-1989 - 18th Annual Report, Ottawa: Law Reform Commission of Canada, 1989 at p. 37, ISBN: 0662573013.  Chapter 3 of report 30  is entitled "Defences" and  includes the defence of necessity and the defence of duress.  This report of the working group was submitted to the Federal-Provincial Coordination Committee of Senior Justice Officials.  Members of the Working Group were from: the Department of Justice Canada, and from the following provincial Attorney General departments or Ministries/Departments of Justice: Ontario, Québec, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Alberta, Manitoba and  British Columbia. This report is available from the Department of Justice Canada.  It was obtained by François Lareau in 1998 under Access to Information Request number A98-00185; available at http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html;  also available in French / aussi disponible en français: CANADA/PROVINCES, Rapport du Groupe de travail chargé de l'étude du chapitre 3 du Rapport no 30 de la Commission de réforme du droit du Canada "Pour une nouvelle codification du droit pénal" (Volume I), [Ottawa]: [Ministère de la Justice Canada],  décembre 1987, vii, 88 p.; Notes de recherche :  ce rapport est mentionné dans Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, 1988-1989, Dix-huitième Rapport annuel,  Ottawa : Commission de réforme du droit du Canada, 1989,  à la p. 40, ISBN: 0662573013.  Le chapitre 3 du rapport 30 a pour titre «Les moyens de défense» et comprend des dispositions sur la contrainte morale et la nécessité.  Ce rapport du groupe de travail a été soumis au Comité fédéral-provincial de coordination composé de fonctionnaires de niveau supérieur de la justice.  Les membres du groupe de travail proviennent du Ministère de la Justice Canada et des ministères des procuereurs généraux /ministères provinciaux de la justice de: l'Ontario, Québec, Nouvelle-Écosse, Saskatchewan, Alberta et Columbie-Britannique. Ce rapport est disponible au Ministère de la Justice Canada.  Il a été obtenu par François Lareau en 1998 suite à une demande d'accès à l'information numéro A-98-00185; disponible à  http://www.lareau-law.ca/DigitalLibrary.html; 
 

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF POLICE CHIEFS, An Evaluation of Volume I of the Report 30 Published by the Law Reform Commission Canada and titled "Recodifying Criminal Law", [Ottawa?]: The Canadian Association of Police Chiefs, 1987, 112 p.;
 

CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION,  CRIMINAL RECODIFICATION TASK FORCE, Principles of Criminal Liability: Proposals for a New General Part of the Criminal Code - Report of the Criminal Recodification Task Force,  Ottawa: Canadian Bar Association, [1992],  x, 190 p., see "X. Necessity" at pp. 87-92, ISBN: 0920742335;  Research Note: This book is also published in CANADA, House of Commons, Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Sub-Committee on the Recodification of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General, [Ottawa]: Queen's Printer for Canada, 1992, issue number 5 of 2  and 18 November 1992, pp. 5A: 1 to 5A: 223 and see "X. Necessity" at  pp. 5A: 92 to 5A: 97;  also published in French / aussi publié en français: ASSOCIATION  DU BARREAU CANADIEN, GROUPE DE TRAVAIL SUR LA NOUVELLE CODIFICATION DU DROIT PÉNAL, Principes de responsabilité pénale: proposition de nouvelles dispositions générales du Code criminel du Canada: Rapport du Groupe de travail sur la nouvelle codification du droit pénal, Ottawa : Association du Barreau canadien, [1992], xiii, 206 p., ISBN: 0920742351; Note de recherche : aussi publié dans CANADA, Chambre des Communes, Procès-verbaux et témoignages du Sous-comité sur la Recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteur général,[Ottawa]: I'Imprimeur de la Reine pour le Canada, 1992, fasicule numéro 5 du  2 et 18 novembre 1992, pp. 5A: 224 à 5A: 460 et voir "X. Nécessité" aux  pp. 5A: 326 à 5A: 331;
 

COLVIN, Eric, 1945-,  Principles of Criminal Law, 2nd ed., [Scarborough]: Carswell, 1991, xxvi, 399 p., see pp. 238-249 on necessity,  ISBN: 0459355619 (bound) and 0459355716 (pbk.);
 

COLVIN, Eric, 1945 and Sanjeev Anand, Principles of Criminal Law, 3rd ed., Toronto: Thomson/Carswell, 2007, li, 599 p., ISBN: 978 0779813247;

COMMISSION OF INQUIRY CONCERNING CERTAIN ACTIVITIES OF THE ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE, Freedom and Security under the Law, Second Report -- Volume 1, [Ottawa]: The Commission, 1981, xxii, 664 p., and see "Necessity", at pp. 370-372, ISBN: 0660109514 and 0660109506 (vol. 1 and 2) (Chairman: Mr. Justice D.C. McDonald); also published in French/aussi publié en français: COMMISSION D'ENQUÊTE SUR CERTAINES ACTIVITÉS DE LA GENDARMERIE ROYALE DU CANADA, Liberté et la sécurité devant la loi: deuxième rapport -- volume 1, [Ottawa]: La Commission, 1981, ISBN: 0660907682 (vol.1 et 2) (Président: D.C. McDonald);
 

CÔTÉ-HARPER, Gisèle, 1942-,  Pierre Rainville, 1964-,  et  Jean Turgeon, 1951-,  Traité de Droit pénal canadien, 4e édition, Cowansville: Éditions Yvon Blais, 1998, lv, 1458 p., voir le chapitre sur la nécessité aux  pp. 561-576, ISBN: 2894512589; note de recherche: la première édition porte le tite: Principes de droit pénal général, 1981;  la deuxième édition en 1984 et la troisième édition en 1989 avec le supplément de 1994 portent le tite Droit pénal canadien;
 

CRÉMAZIE, Jacques, Les lois criminelles anglaises traduites et compilées de Blackstone, Chitty, Russell et autres criminalistes anglais et telles que suivies en Canada: arrangées suivant les dispositions introduites dans le Code criminel de cette province par les statuts provinciaux 4 et 5 Victoria, Chap. 24, 25, 26 et 27, comprenant aussi un précis des statuts pénaux de la ci-devant Province du Bas-Canada, Québec: Imprimerie de Frechette, 1842, xii, 591 p., voir la nécesité  à la p. 14 ( 1 p. seulement);

Criminal Code -- Annotated codes used by practioners/ Code criminel --codes annotés utilisés par les practiciens

    in English (published every year) /en anglais:

GOLD, Allan D., The Practioner's Criminal Code, Markham, Ont.: LexisNexis Canada, 2008;

GREENSPAN, Edward L. and Marc Rosenberg, annotations by, Martin's Annual Criminal Code 2008, Aurora: Canada Law Book Inc.;
WATT, David and Michelle Fuerst, annotations by, The 2008 Annotated Tremeear's Criminal Code, Toronto: Carswell, A Thomson Company;
 
     in French/en français (publié chaque année):
COURNOYER, Guy et Gilles Ouimet, Code criminel annoté 2008, Cowansville: Éditions Yvon Blais, une société Thomson; note: législation bilingue/bilingual legislation;
          DUBOIS, Alain et Philip Schneider, Code criminel et lois connexes annotés 2008, Brossard: Publications CCH Ltée; note: législation bilingue/bilingual legislation;

DELASSALLE,  Aymeri,  Les moyens de défense de nécessité et de contrainte en droit pénal international, mémoire de  maîtrise en droit international, Université du Québec à Montréal, janvier 2007; titre noté dans mes recherches mais thèse non consultée; résumé et table des matières disponibles à http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/juris/memoires/delassalle_a.pdf (vérifié le 3 juin 2008);


EMPEY, Burton Gordon, 1964-,  A Proposal to Revise the Defence of Necessity, Master of Arts (MA) Degree thesis, University of New Brunswick, 1993, xxxvii, 165 p.; copy at the Library of Parliament, K5064 E56;
 

EWASCHUK, Eugene G., Criminal Pleadings and Practice in Canada, 2 vol., 2nd ed., Aurora (Ontario): Canada Law Book, 1987-,  loose-leaf,  on necessity, see vol. 2, pp. 21-22 to 21-24.2,  ISBN: 0888040687 (vol. 1) and 0888041438 (vol. 2);

FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL WORKING GROUP ON HOMICIDE, Final Report of the Federal/Provincial Working Group on Homicide, [Ottawa], [Department of Justice Canada], June 1990, updated April 1991, xii, 170 p. (Co-Chairmen: Howard F. Morton,  Ministry of the Attorney General, Province of Ontario and Jean-François Dionne, Quebec Department of Justice); copy of this report was obtained by François Lareau under an Access to Information Act request response dated November 9, 1998, file A-98-00183 from the Department of Justice Canada; also available in French / aussi disponible en français : Groupe de travail fédéral-provincial sur l'homicide, Rapport final du groupe de travail fédéral-provincial sur l'homicide, [Ottawa], [Ministère de la Justice Canada], juin 1990, révisé avril 1991, xii, 172 p. (Co-Présidents:  Howard F. Morton, Ministère du Procureur général de l'Ontario et Jean-François Dionne, Ministère de la Justice du Québec); copie de ce rapport a été obtenu par François Lareau dans la réponse en date du 9 novembre 1998 de sa demande à la Loi sur l'accès à l'information, au Ministère de la Justice Canada, dossier A-98-00183;
 

FERGUSON, Gerry  A. and John C. Bouck, Canadian Criminal Jury Instructions (CRIMJI), 3rd edition, vol. 2, Vancouver (British Columbia) : Continuing Legal Education Society of British  Columbia, 1994-,  ISBN: 0865047715, see "Necessity" at  8.48;
 

FITZGERALD, Patrick, 1928-, This Law of Ours, Scarborough (Ontario): Prentice-Hall of Canada, 1977, [xi], 365 p., see chapter 2, "Tragic Choices", pp. 40-54, ISBN: 0139192743; pp. 40-49 are also found at W. Wesley Pue, ed., Law 51.00 Introduction to Legal Studies, Volume 1 - Perspectives on Law and Constitution, 4th ed., North York: Captus Press, 1988, viii, various pagings, at pp. 2-5 to 2-9, ISBN: 0921801327;
 

FORTIN, Jacques et Louise Viau, Traité de droit pénal général, Montréal : Éditions Thémis, 1982, xi, 457 p., voir la nécessité aux pp. 284-289;
 

GIROUX, Michel, 1962-, et Eugène O'Sullivan, Droit pénal général, Cowansville: Éditions Yvon Blais, 1997, xiii, 108 p., voir la nécessité aux pp. 101-105, (Collection La common law en poche; vol. 7),  ISBN: 2894512198 (aussi publié Bruxelles: Bruylant);
 

GRANT, Isabel, 1957-, Dorothy Chunn and Christine Boyle, The Law of Homicide, Scarborough: Carswell (Thomson Professional Publishing), 1994, see pp. 6-71 to 6-77 on necessity, ISBN: 0459552244 (loose-leaf) and 0459552562 (pbk.);
 

HALLEY, Paule, 1964-, Le droit pénal de l'environnement: l'interdiction de polluer, Cowansville: Éditions Yvon Blais, 2001, xxi, 403 p., voir "La défense de nécessité" aux pp. 222-228, ISBN: 2894515103; copie à la bibliothèque de la Cour suprême du Canada, KF 3775 ZB5 H35 2001;
 

__________Instituer la prudence environnementale : le régime pénal québécois de lutte contre la pollution, thèse de doctorat, LL.D., Université de Montréal, 1994, ix, 332 p., voir "la défense de nécessité" aux pp. 205-212;  cité par CÔTÉ-HARPER, Rainville et Turgeon, supra, p. 1282, leur note 101;
 

KAMEL-TOUEG, Nabil, Précis de droit pénal général - Droit pénal I, 2e édition, Mont-Royal (Québec) : Modulo Éditeur, 1994, ix, 242 p., voir les pp. 205-209 sur la nécessité, ISBN: 2891135024;
 

KLINEBERG, Joanne, Moral Involuntariness as a Principle of Excusing Conditions : What's Choice Got to Do with It?, University of British Columbia, LL.M. thesis, 2002, v, 116 leaves; abstract at  http://www.library.ubc.ca/law/abstracts/klineberg.html (accessed on 28 May 2005);

"ABSTRACT
The Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Ruzic (2001) formulates a new principle of fundamental justice under section 7 of the Charter. This new principle of fundamental justice holds that notwithstanding that a person committed a crime with the required guilty state of mind, they must not be punished if their actions were "morally involuntary", that is to say if their acts were not the "product of a free will...unhindered by external constraints". This principle relates to defences based on external circumstances. As a constitutional principle, it may result in the redefinition of existing defences such as a necessity, duress and self-defence, and may also lead to the development of new defences. [abstract continued at web site]


KNOLL, Patrick J., 1950-, Criminal Law Defences: Textbook Edition of the title Criminal Law Defences Canadian Encyclopedic Digest Third Edition, 2nd ed.,  Scarborough: Carswell (Thomson Professional Publishing), 1994, 224 p., at pp. 150-152, ISBN: 0459552392;  there is now a 3rd edition, 2006;
 

LIBMAN, Rick,  1956-,  Libman on regulatory offences in Canada, Saltspring Island, BC : Earlscourt Legal Press, c2002-, 1 v. (loose-leaf), see section 8.2, "Necessity", ISBN: 0968233864; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, Ottawa, KF 1292 A6 L53 2002;
 

LINDEN, Allen M., Canadian Tort Law, 6th ed., Toronto and Vancouver: Butterworths, 1997, xc, 751 p., see "Necessity" at pp. 84-87; Research Note: this book gives you some information on how the civil law deals with this defence;
 

MEE, John Patrick, The Defences of Duress and Necessity in the Criminal Law, LL.M. thesis, York University, Toronto,  1989, vi, 225 p.;
 

MEWETT, Allan W., 1930-, and Morris Manning, Mewett & Manning on Criminal Law, 3rd ed, Toronto: Butterworths, 1994, lxiv, 959 p.,  see pp. 529-532 on necessity; ISBN: 0409903752 (bound) and 0433396458 (pbk.);
 

NATIONAL DEFENCE (Department of), Law of Armed Conflict at the Operational and Tactical Levels, [Ottawa], 2001, 1 volume (various pagings; total pages: 246), at p.16-6 and 16-7; notes; Issued on Authority of the Chief of Defence Staff; Joint Doctrine Manual; Custodian JAG (Judge Advocate General); DND Publication Number: B-GJ-005-104/FP-021; available at http://www.forces.gc.ca/jag/training/publications/law_of_armed_conflict/loac_2004_e.pdf (accessed on 20 August 2005); also published in French/aussi publié en français: DÉFENSE NATIONALE (Ministère de la), Le Droit des conflits armées aux niveaux opérationel et tactique,  [Ottawa], 2001, pagination multiple (total de 250 p.), à la p. 16-7; notes: manuel de doctrine interarmées; Publiée avec l'autorisation du Chef d'état-major de la Défense; Responsable JAG (Juge avocat général); numéro de publication du MDN: B-GJ-005-104/FP-021, disponible à  http://www.forces.gc.ca/jag/training/publications/law_of_armed_conflict/loac_2004_f.pdf (visionné le 20 août 2005);
 

"CHAPTER 16
WAR CRIMES, INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL LIABILITY AND COMMAND RESPONSIBILITY...

SECTION 5 - POSSIBLE DEFENCES

1612. MILITARY NECESSITY

1. Since the conventional laws of armed conflict have been drafted with the concept of military necessity in mind, it is not open to a person accused of a war crime to plead this in defence, unless the act in question relates to a breach of a treaty provision, which stipulates that military advantage may be taken into consideration. Some treaty provisions do specify that certain acts may be done if required by military necessity. If a commander performs these acts, then a subsequent assessment of whether or not these actswere required by military necessity must be based on the information available to the commander at the time and not in an abuse of hindsight.

eg GI Art 33 (2)
 

1613. PERSONAL NECESSITY

1. Persons accused of a war crime cannot plead that they acted by way of personal necessity on account of immediate danger to their own lives or property, although this may be taken into consideration in mitigation of punishment."
(pp. 16-1 and 16-6 and 16-7)
------
"CHAPITRE 16
CRIMES DE GUERRE, RESPONSABILITÉ CRIMINELLE INDIVIDUELLE ET RESPONSABILITÉ DU COMMANDEMENT ...

SECTION 5 - DÉFENSES POSSIBLES

1612. NÉCESSITÉ MILITAIRE

1. Comme le Droit des conflits armés conventionnel a été rédigé en tenant compte du concept de nécessité militaire, il n’est pas possible pour une personne accusée d'un crime de guerre de plaider ce point pour sa défense, à moins que l’acte en question porte sur une infraction à la disposition d’un traité qui stipule que l’avantage militaire peut être pris en considération. Certaines dispositions de traités spécifient que certains actes peuvent être accomplis lorsque la nécessité militaire l’exige. Si un commandant pose ces actes, une évaluation subséquente visant à savoir si ces actes étaient ou non exigés par la nécessité
militaires peut être basée sur l’information fournie au commandant à ce moment et non sur un jugement après coup.

eg GI Art 33 (2)
 

1613. NÉCESSITÉ PERSONNELLE

1. Les personnes accusées d’un crime de guerre ne peuvent pas plaider qu’elles ont agi par nécessité personnelle en raison d’un danger immédiat à leur propre vie ou propriété, même si cela peut être pris en compte pour atténuer la peine."
(pp. 16-1 et 16-7)
 

PARENT, Hugues, 1970-, Traité de droit criminel, Tome 1. L'acte volontaire et les  moyens de défense, Montréal : Éditions Thémis, 2003, xxviii, 587 p., voir "La nécessité" aux pp. 379-422, ISBN: 2894001703;  une édition plus récente a été publiée, à vérifier;

___________Traité de droit criminel, Tome Premier:  L'imputabilité, 2e édition, Montréal : Éditions Thémis, 2005, xxxii, 1023 p., voir le Chapitre 6, "La nécessité", aux pp. 483-533, ISBN: 2894001703; copie à la Bibliothèque de la Cour suprême du Canada, KF 9220 ZA2 P39 2005, t. 1, c. 01; une édition plus récente a été publiée, à vérifier;
 

PICKARD, Toni and Phil Goldman, Dimensions of Criminal Law, 2nd ed., Toronto: Emond Montgomery, 1996, xxci, 999 p., see "Necessity Doctrine: Legal Images in the Service of Class Power", pp. 946-999 (part of text include case-law of Perka and Dudley and Stephens);
 

ROACH, Kent, 1961-, Criminal Law, Concord (Ontario): Irwin Law, 1996, xiv, 240 p., (series; Essentials of Canadian Law), ISBN: 1552210006; Research Note:  see Chapter 8, "Provocation, Self-Defence, Necessity and Duress" at pp. 162-191 and more particularly for necessity,  pp. 182-184; there is now a 2nd edition;
 

ROBERT, Marie-Pierre, 1977-, La défense culturelle : un moyen de défense non souhaitable en droit pénal canadien, Cowansville (Québec) : Éditions Y. Blais, c2004, xviii, 152 p., voir "La nécessité" aux pp. 65-70 et "Conclusion partielle" aux pp. 90-93 (Collection; Collection Minerve), ISBN: 2894517394; notes: Présenté à l'origine comme thèse LL.M., Université de Montréal, 2002, dir. de recherches: Prof. Anne-Marie Boisvert;
 

RUBY, Clayton, 1942-, Jill Copeland, Breese Davies, Delmar Doucette and Richard Litkoski, Setencing, 6th ed., Markham (Ontario): LexisNexis Butterworths, 2004, see the effect of necessity and duress (short of a full defence) on sentencing, at pp. 263-264, ISBN: 0433443162; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, KF9685 R82 2004;
 

SINCLAIR-PROWSE, Janet A., 1947-, and Elizabeth Bennett,  Working Manual of Criminal Law, Scarborough: Carswell, 1984-, looseleaf, see defence of necessity at pp. 66 to 66.3 (release number 2 of 1995), ISBN: 0459359703;
 

STUART, Don, 1943-,  and Ronald Joseph Delisle, Learning Canadian Criminal Law, 7th ed., Scarborough (Ontario): Carswell, Thompson Professional Publishing, 1999, xxv, 1010 p., see necessity at  pp. 766-789, ISBN: 0459270613;
 

STUART, Don, 1943-, Canadian Criminal Law: A Treatise, 3rd ed., Scarborough:  Carswell, 1995, l, 672 p.,  see pp. 473-488 on necessity; ISBN: 0459553062 (bound) and 0459553089 (pbk.); 4th ed., 2001; there is now a 5th ed.: Toronto: Thomson/Carswell, 2007, xix, 815 p., ISBN: 978 0779812950;
 

VERDUN-JONES, Simon N. (Simon Nicholas), 1947-,  Criminal Law in Canada: Cases, Questions & The Code, 2nd ed., Toronto: Harcourt Brace & Company Canada, 1997,  xvii, 370 p., see "Necessity" at pp. 283-292,  ISBN: 0774731826;
 

WATT, David, 1948-,  Ontario Specimen Jury Instructions (Criminal), Toronto: Thomson/Carswell,  [2003], xiii, 1101 p., see: "Final 74, Necessity, at pp. 1046-1051, ISBN: 0459254928; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada, Ottawa, KF 9682 W38 2003 c. 01;
 

B- Articles
 

BENNETT, Elizabeth, "The defence of necessity" in National criminal law program (2001 : Charlottetown, P.E.I.), ed., National criminal law program / The Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Charlottetown : Federation of Law Societies, 2001, in vol. 2 of 2; copy at Department of Justice Canada, Prairies Region, Edmonton Office, Law Library, call number: KF 9655 N36 2001; title noted but not consulted yet;
 

BERGER, Benjamin L., "A Choice Among Values: Theoretical and Historical Perspectives on the Defence of Necessity", (2002) 39 Alberta Law Review 848-863; available at http://www.law.uvic.ca/bberger/documents/ChoiceAmongValues_001.pdf (accessed on 24 March 2008)
;

___________"A Due Measure of Fear in Criminal Judgment", forthcoming in (2008) Supreme Court Law Review, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1147813; discusses Perka;

BICKENBACH, Jerome E., "The Defence of Necessity", (1983) 13 Canadian Journal of Philosophy 79-100;
 

BOURQUE, Sophie, "Les moyens de défense" dans Droit pénal (Infractions, moyens de défense et sentence) volume 11, Cowansville: Éditions Yvon Blais, 2000, aux pp. 163-188, voir sur la nécessité, la p. 184 (Collection; Collection de droit 1999-2000, vol. 11), ISBN: 289451333X;
 

___________"Les moyens de défense" dans Claude Leblond, responsable du secteur Droit pénal, École du Barreau du Québec, Droit pénal: infractions, moyens de défense et sentence, Cowansville (Québec): Les Éditions Yvon Blais, 2001, 264 p., aux pp. 161-188, et plus particulièrement, "La nécessité" aux pp. 183-184 (Collection; Collection de droit 2000-2001; volume 11), ISBN: 2894513976; copie à la Bibliothèque de la Cour suprême du Canada, KF385 ZB5 C681 v. 11 2000-01 c. 01 (24 février 2003);
 

BOYLE, Christine, Marie-Andrée Bertrand, Céline Lacerte-Lamontagne and Rebecca Shamai (paper prepared for for Status of Women Canada), and edited by J. Stewart Russell, , A Feminist Review of Criminal Law, [Ottawa]: Minister of Supply and Services Canada, 1985, xxiv, 210 p., on necessity, see pp. 43-44 and 47 (theses pages written by Boyle), ISBN: 0662146182; information on the French version / informations sur la version française: BOYLE, Christine, Marie-Andrée Bertrand, Céline Lacerte-Lamontagne et Rebecca Shamai (étude préparée pour Condition féminine Canada), et J. Stuart Russell, rédacteur, Un examen féministe du droit criminel, Ottawa, Ministère des Approvisionnements et Services Canada, 1985, xxv, 232 p., sur l'état de nécessité, voir les pp. 50-51 et 54 (ces pages écrites par Boyle), ISBN: 0662936744;
 

BOYLE, Christine,"Commentary",  in  Don Stuart, 1943-,  R.J. Delisle and Allan Manson, eds., Towards a Clear and Just Criminal Law: A Criminal Reports Forum, Scarborough (Ontario): Carswell, Thomson Professional Publishing, 1999, v, 574 p., at pp. 146-155, see "Necessity" at pp. 153-154, ISBN: 045927077X; comments on Professor Stuart's proposals on the General Part, see Stuart, "A Case for a General Part", infra;
 

_________"The Defence of Necessity - Who Needs It?" in Jennie Abell, 1951-,  and Elizabeth Sheehy, Criminal Law & Procedure: Proof, Defences, and Beyond, North York (Ontario): Captus Press, 1995, vii, 406 p., at pp. 348-350, ISBN: 1895712920; research note: there is now a 2nd ed., Captus Press,  1998 which I have not consulted;
 

BRYANT, Marian E., "Defence of necessity" in National Criminal Law Program: Substantive Criminal Law (1993: Montreal), [ed.],  National Criminal Law Program, The Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Montreal (PQ): Federation of Law Societies, 1993, 2 volumes; information from  http://gate.library.ualberta.ca/ (The GATE:  NEOS Libraries' Catalogue) as seen on 11 November 2000; document not consulted;


CAVOUKIAN, "Disclosure of Information  Permitted  in Emergency  and other Urgent Circumstances", (July 2005) 7 Fact Sheet 1-4; "Fact Sheet" is published by  the Information and Privacy  Commissioner /Ontario, available at http://www.ipc.on.ca/images/Resources/up-3fact_07_e.pdf;
 

COFFIN, Graeme, "Necessity and Duress" in Canada, House of Commons, Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Sub-Committee on the Recodification of the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Standing Committee on Justice and the Solicitor General, [Ottawa]: Queen's Printer for Canada, 1992,  issue  number 2 of 15 June 1992, pp. 2A:47 - 2A-57, available at http://www.lareau-legal.ca/Coffin1992.pdf;  also published in French/aussi publié en français: COFFIN, Graeme, [TRADUCTION] «La nécessité et la contrainte» dans Chambre des Communes, Procès-verbaux et témoignages du Sous-comité sur la Recodification de la Partie générale du Code criminel du Comité permanent de la justice et du Solliciteur général,  [Ottawa]: I'Imprimeur de la Reine pour le Canada, 1992, fasicule numéro 2 du 15 juin 1992 aux pp. 2A:172 - 2A-187, disponible à http://www.lareau-legal.ca/Coffin1992F.pdf;


 ____________ PDF "A New Codification of Necessity and Duress", paper submitted to Professor Martin Friedland, University of Toronto on January 6, 1992, 42 p.;
   
 

COLE, David  P. and Julie Willmot, "Some Aspects of the Law Relating to Escapes, Part II: Prosecuting and Defending an Escape Related Offence", (1980) 17 Criminal Reports (3d) 97-144, see "The Defences of Necessity and Duress" at pp. 126-131;
 

COLVIN, Eric, "Ordinary and Reasonable People: The Design of Objective Tests of Criminal Responsibility", (2001) 27(2) Monash University Law Review 197-228;
 

COUGHLAN, Stephen G., "Duress, Necessity, Self-Defence and Provocation: Implications of Radical Change?", (2002) 7 Canadian Criminal Law 147-208;


DICKENS, Bernard, "The Morgentaler Case: Criminal Process and Abortion Law", (1976) 14 Osgoode Hall Law Journal 229-274;
 

DUBBER, Markus Dirk,  "Commentary" in Don Stuart, 1943-,  R.J. Delisle and Allan Manson, eds., Towards a Clear and Just Criminal Law: A Criminal Reports Forum, Scarborough (Ontario): Carswell, Thomson Professional Publishing, 1999, v, 574 p., at pp. 156-182, see "Necessity" at pp. 180-181, ISBN: 045927077X;  Research Note: consists of a commentary on Stuart, Don's article "A Case for a General Part", infra;
 

"Editorial", (2001) 6 Canadian Criminal Law Review 129-131; also published in French/aussi publié en français: "Éditorial", (2001) Revue canadienne de droit pénal 129-131; deals with the decision of  R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 Supreme Court Reports 3;
 

EDWARDS, J. Ll. J., "Bora Laskin and the Criminal Law", (1985) 35 University of Toronto Law Journal 325-352, see at pp. 338-341;
 

EVANS, Christopher D., "The Defence of Necessity (Compulsion by Circumstances)" in National Criminal Law Program: Substantive Criminal Law, Winnipeg, Man. : The Federation of Law Societies of Canada, 1996, vol. 2 of 2, section 16.2, 11 p;  Notes: "University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, July 15 to 19, 1996"; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada;
 

GALLANT, Bruno, "Analyse critique de l'intégration de principes darwininiens au droit dans le contexte général de l'affaire R. c. Latimer", (2004) 53 University of New Brunswick Law Journal 43-77;
 

GALLOWAY, Donald, "Necessity as a Justification: A Critique of Perka", (1986)  Dalhousie Law Journal 158-172;
 

GARNER, Dan, "The Face of Torture -- A choice of evils: If the stakes are high enough, is torture permissible?", The Ottawa Citizen, Friday, 6 February 2004, at pp. A7-A8; (part of a series of 7 articles, "The Face of Torture" by Dan Gardner, published in The Ottawa Citizen, 1 to 7 February 2004);


GHANAYIM, Khalid, "Excuse Necessity in Western Legal Philosophy", (January 2006) 19(1) The Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence  31-65; translation by Avinoam Sharon; examines Pufendorf, Kant, Fichte and Feuerbach; important contribution to the subject particularly as to Kant;

__________"Excused Necessity: A Defence in the Criminal Code -- A Comparative and Doctrinal Study", (2006) 11(1) Canadian Criminal Law Review 53-96;  
 

GOLD, Alan D., Annual Review of Criminal Law 1983, Toronto: Carswell, 1983, xxxix, 282 p., at pp. 158-161, discusses R. v. Perka (1982) 69 C.C.C. (2d) 405 (B.C. C.A.) and other cases on necessity, ISBN: 0459360108;
 

__________Annual Review of Criminal Law 1985, Toronto: Carswell, 1985, lviii, 163 p., at pp. 91-92 discusses Perka v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 232, ISBN: 0459382306;
 

___________"Escape Custody - Necessity", (1979-80) 22 The Criminal Law Quarterly 182-186;
 

GOMBAY, André, "Postscript, June 1985",  (1985) 24 Dialogue --  Canadian Philosophical Review 613-616 (discusses Perka v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 232);
 

GREENE, Sheila H., prepared by, for the Newfoundland Women's Directorate,  "The Impact on Women of the White Paper Proposals on the Defences of Duress and Necessity", 1994, 17 p.;  research note: "This research has been completed for the Federal/Provincial/Territorial Senior Status of Women Officials and does not necessarily reflect their views" (as written on the cover page); a French translation exists/une traduction a été faite de ce document: "Les conséquences pour les femmes des propositions  formulées dans le livre blanc concernant les moyens de défense fondés sur la contrainte et sur la necessité", 1995, 19 p.;
 

GRONDIN, Rachel, "Note.  Trois moyens de défense générale: la contrainte physique, la contrainte par menaces et la nécessité", (1983) 14 Revue générale de droit 493-508;
 

GUY, Paul, "R. v. Latimer and the Defence of Necessity: One Step Forward, two Steps Back", (2003) 66 Saskatchewan Law Review 485-510;

HALLEY, Paule, «La loi fédérale sur les pêches et son régime pénal de protection environnementale», (1992) 33 Cahiers de droit 759-856, voir «La défense de nécessité» aux pp. 845-849; cité par CÔTÉ-HARPER, Rainville et Turgeon, supra, p. 1282, leur note 101;
 

HEALY, Patrick, "Innocence and Defences", (1993) 19 Criminal Reports (4th)  121-131 (deals with necessity, duress and R. v. Langlois (1993) 19 C.R. (4th) 87 (Que. C.A.));
 

HEAVIN, Heather, “Human Rights Issues in R. v. Latimer and Their Significance for Disabled Canadians”, (2001) 64(2) Sasktachewan Law Review 613-629, see “Necessity” at pp. 623-625; on R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3;


HOLLAND,  Winifred H., "Murder and Related Issues: An Analysis of the Law in Canada -- Report to the Law Commission", July 2005, in The Law Commission, The Law of Murder: Overseas  Comparative Studies, [London: HMSO, 2005], at pp. 22-65;  available at http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/comparative_studies.pdf (accessed on 27 December 2005); 


HORDER, Jeremy, "Self-Defence, Necessity and Duress: Understanding the Relationship", (1998) 16 Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence 143-165;
 

ILLICO INC., «La défense de nécessité», recherche jurisprudentielle, CR-6442, jan. 1994, d'Illico Inc.; Tél. (514) 922-1271; (800) 663-3824; fax (514) 649- 7619, voir aussi le site web d'Illico;
 

KAISER, H. Archibald, "Latimer: the End of Judicial Involvement and an Unsatisfactory De Facto Beginning of the Clemency Process, (2001) 39(1) Criminal Reports (5th) 42-57, see "The Defence of Necessity" at pp. 42-46; discusses the Supreme Court decision of  R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3;
 

KEIVER, Michael, "The Pacific Salmon War: The Defence of Necessity Revisited", (1998) 21 Dalhousie Law Journal 408-428; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX Periodicals, KEN 7404 .D353;


KLAR, Lewis N., "The Defence of Private Necessity in Canadian  Tort law",  (2005)  Issues in Legal Scholarship, 32 p.;  "Issues in Legal Scholarship is one of The Journals of Legal Scholarship, produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press (bepress)";


LEBEL, Louis, "La consolidation des fondements de la responsabilité pénale en droit criminel canadien depuis l'entrée en vigueur de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés",  (2009) 50 Cahiers de Droit 735-748 et voir à la p. 746;

LEGAL AID ONTARIO / AIDE JURIDIQUE ONTARIO -- LAO  LAW, Criminal Law Memoranda, Toronto, catalogue current as of February 1, 2006; see http://www.lss.bc.ca/__shared/assets/LAOlawindex1225.pdf  and http://www.legalaid.on.ca/ (both sites accessed on 24 February 2006);
-D8-1 Necessity (1 Jun 2005; 58 pages);
-O31-9 Marihuana -- Medical Necessity (30 Jan 2005; 32 pages);
 

LEIGH, L.H.,  "The Law Reform Commission of Canada and the Reform of the General Part", [1983] Criminal Law Review 438-449, see at pp. 445-447, the discussion of the Commission's proposals on duress and necessity contained in their working paper 29, Criminal Law: The General Part: Liability and Defences, supra;
 

__________"Necessity and the Case of  Dr. Morgentaler", [1978] Criminal  Law Review 151-158;
 

MARCOTTE, Alain,  "Les moyens de défense en matière pénale dans le contexte de l'obligation de protection du travailleur, victime potentielle",  dans
Développements récents en droit de la santé et sécurité au travail, 2001, Cowansville (Québec): Éditions Yvon Blais, 2001, xii, 308 p. aux pp. 171-204, voir "La nécesité" aux pp. 200-201 (Collection; Service de la formation permanente Barreau du Québec; vol. 148), ISBN: 2895414700;
 

MAYRAND, Albert, «Droit de la bête ou droit de l'homme», (1961- 62) 4 Criminal Law Quarterly 42-47; translated: "The Rights of Animals or the Rights of Men", (1961- 62) 4 Criminal Law Quarterly 48-53 [deals with the right of an hunter to kill a moose when attacked by it];
 

McINNES, Mitchell, "Protecting the Good Samaritan: Defences for the Rescuer in Anglo-Canadian Criminal Law", (1994) 36 Criminal Law Quarterly 331-371, see "4. Necessity" at pp. 354-370;


___________"Restitution and the Rescue of Life", (1994) 32 Alberta Law Review 37-70; civil law; useful for the researcher;
 

MITCHELL, John K., "Necessity: Choosing Between the Lesser of Two Evils", in National Criminal Law Program (2004 : Halifax, N.S.), Dalhousie University, Faculty of Law, and Federation of Law Societies of Canada, Substantive criminal law : 2004 National Criminal Law Program, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, July 12 to 16, 2004 / presented by the Federation of Law Societies of Canada in conjunction with the Faculty of Law, Dalhousie University, [s.l. : s.n.], 2004, 3 v., in volume 2, Tab 13.2, 11 p.; copy at the Library of the Supreme Court of Canada KF9220 ZA2 N38 2004;
 

MORGAN, Edward M., "The Defence of Necessity: Justification or Excuse?", (1984) 42 University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review 165-183;
 

"Necessity and the Law", (1972) 20 Chitty's Law Journal 163-165 (no author cited);


PACIOCCO, David M., "Articles and Addresses  No-one Wants  to Be Eaten:  The Logic and Experience  of the Law of Necessity and Duress",  (2010)  56(3) The Criminal Law Quarterly 240;
 

PARKER, Graham, "Developments in Criminal Law: The 1983-84 Term", (1986) 8 Supreme Court Law Review 165-193, see Part IV, "The Final Word on Necessity", pp. 175-181 (discusses Perka v. R., [1984] 2 S.C.R. 232); 
 

PETERS, Yvonne, “Reflections on the Latimer Case: The Rationale for a Disability Rights Lens”, (2001) 64(2) Sasktachewan Law Review  631-643, see “The Defence of Necessity and the Devaluation of Disability” at pp. 640-642; on R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3;
 

PIETTE, Jean et Isabelle Fournier, "Le développement des moyens de défense en droit pénal de l'environnement", dans Développements résents en droit de l'environnement, Textes des conférences du colloque tenu le 14 octobre 1994, Éditions Yvon Blais, 1994, v, 411 p., aux pp. 291-306 et voir "La défense de nécessité", aux pp. 302-303, ISBN: 2890739945 (Formation permanente du Barreau du Québec - Volume 55); copie à l'Université d'Ottawa, FTX General: KEQ 885 .Z85 D476  1994;
 

QUIGLEY, Tim, "R. v. Latimer:  Hard Cases Make Interesting Law",  (1995) 41 C.R. (4th) 89-99; on R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3;  


RIVET, Michèle, "Le Dr. Morgentaler devant la Cour d'appel", (1974) 15 Cahiers de droit 889-896,

ROACH, Kent, 1961-, “Crime and Punishment in the Latimer Case”, (2001) 64(2) Sasktachewan Law Review 469-490, see “Necessity” at pp. 478-481; available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1215196 (accessed on 3 September 2008); on R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3; 

 
___________"Duress and Necessity in the White Paper", [Ottawa]: Law Reform  Division, Dept. of Justice Canada, 1994, 18 p, available at my Digital Library; also available in French/aussi disponible en français: «Les moyens de défense fondés sur la contrainte et sur la nécessité dans le livre blanc»,  [Ottawa] : Division de la réforme du droit, Ministère de la justice du Canada, 1994, 20 p., disponible à ma Bibliothèque numérique; research note: the "White Paper" refers to CANADA, The Minister of Justice of Canada, Proposals to Amend the Criminal Code (general principles), supra;   


SAKAR, Tania, “Do Parents Matter?  A Commentary on R. v. Latimer”, (2001) 64(2) Sasktachewan Law Review  601-612, on R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3;
 

SAMUELS, Sharon and G. (Gil) D. McKinnon, "Necessity",  December 5, 1991, 26 p.; (series; Working Paper, Canadian Bar Association, National Criminal Justice Section, Committee on Criminal Code Reform; number 6), discussion paper mentioned in The Canadian Bar Association, Task Force Report, Principles of Criminal Liability: Proposals for a New General Part of the Criminal Code - Report of the Criminal Recodification Task Force,  Ottawa: Canadian Bar Association, [1992],  x, 190 p.,  at p. 189, ISBN: 0920742335; research note: paper is available for a fee from the Canadian Bar Association, Ottawa; also available at the University of Montréal, Library of the Faculty of Law (call number: HAAD W926 v. 06 1991);
 

SCHABAS, Paul B., "Notes and Comments: Justification, Excuse and the Defence of  Necessity: A Comment on Perka v. The Queen",  (1984-85) 27 Criminal Law Quarterly 278-287;
 

SCHACHTER, Raphaël H., "Taking the Law into Your Own Hands: Child Abduction and the Defence of Necessity",  in Edward L. Greenspan, ed., Counsel for the Defence: The Bernard Cohn Memorial Lectures in Criminal Law, Toronto: Irwin Law, 2005, xix, 267 p., at pp. 149-156, ISBN: 1552211029; copy at the University of Ottawa, FTX KE 8809.5 .C69 2005;
 

SHARPE, Robert J., and Kent Roach, 1961-, Brian Dickson: A Judge's Journey, Toronto/Buffalo/London: Published for the Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History by University of Toronto Press, 2003, xiv, 576 p., see Chapter 11, "Fault and Free Will", at pp. 218-239, and in particular, "No Deliberate Disobedience of the Law", at pp. 234-236; and "An Uncompromised Insistence on Fault", at p. 239, ISBN: 0802089526; note: a publication of the Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History;
 

SNEIDERMAN, Barney, “Latimer in the Supreme Court: Necessity, Compassionate Homicide, and Mandatory Sentencing”,  (2001) 64(2) Sasktachewan Law Review 511-544, see “Necessity” at pp. 512-535; on R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3; article available at  http://www.umanitoba.ca/centres/ethics/articles/Barticle3.htm (accessed on 8 March 2003);
 

SNEIDERMAN, Barney and Raymond Deutscher, "Dr. Morrison and Her Dying Patient: A Case of Medical Necessity", (2002) 10 Health Law Journal 1-30; copy at the Library of Parliament;
 

SNEIDERMAN, Barney and Marja Verhoef, "Patient Autonomy and the Defence of Medical Necessity: Five Dutch Euthanasia Cases", (1996) 34 Alberta Law Review 374-415 (Table of Contents includes: "3. Homicide and the Defence of Necessity in Common Law Jurisprudence", "4. Abortion and the Defence of Necessity in Common Law Jurisdiction" and "5. Euthanasia and the Evolution of the Defence of Medical Necessity in Dutch law");
 

STUART, Don, 1943-, "Annotation:  Perka et al. v. R. (1984) 42 C.R. (3d) 113 (S.C.C.)", (1984) 42 C.R. (3d) 115-117;
 

___________"Annotation: R. v. Young", (1984) 39 C.R. (3d)  290 (Ont. Prov. Ct.)", (1984) 39 C.R. (3d) 290-291;
 

___________"A Case for A General Part" in Don Stuart, 1943-,  R.J. Delisle and Allan Manson, eds., Towards a Clear and Just Criminal Law: A Criminal Reports Forum, Scarborough (Ontario): Carswell, Thomson Professional Publishing, 1999, v, 574 p., at pp. 95-145, see "Necessity" at pp. 132-133, ISBN: 045927077X;
 

___________"A Hard Case Makes for Too Harsh Law", (2001) 39(1) Criminal Reports (5th) 58-64; discusses the Supreme Court of Canada decision of  R. v. Latimer and the defence of necessity at pp. 58-61; on R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3;
 

SUSSMANN, Frederick B., "The Defence of Private Necessity and  the Problem of Compensation", (1967) 2 Ottawa Law  Review 184-194; on civil law but of interest to the subject;
 

TANOVICH, David M. and Gerry Ferguson, Annual Review of Criminal Law 2001, Carswell, a Thomson Company, 2002, xxvii, 200 p., ISBN: 0459271148; see  "Necessity" at pp. 46-48; the authors discuss the Supreme Court of Canada decision of Latimer;
 

TROTTER, Gary T., "Necessity and Death: Lessons from Latimer and the Case of the Conjoined Twins", (April 2003) 40(4) Alberta Law Review 817-840;

Abstract
    "The availability of the defence of necessity in cases of homicide is a complex issue in both Canadian and British jurisprudence.  This article examines the divergent judicial and academic views and argues that, while necessity may be available for certain kinds of homicide, it should be rejected as a legitimate defence to intentional killings.  The author looks closely at two recent cases in which the question arose as to whether or not the killing a human being is ever justifiable or excusable on the basis of necessity: the Canadian case of R. v. Latimer and the British case of Re A (Children).

    The author argues that the approach of the Latimer court is preferable, advancing this position from a number of angles.  Underlying rationales for the defence of necessity in Anglo-Canadian jurisprudence are examined as well as the conceptually similar defence of duress, both at common law and in s. 17 of the Criminal code.  Both of these points are reinforced and analyzed via a discussion of the sanctity-of-life principle in Canadian criminal law.  The article makes clear the essential nature of the issues raised in both Latimer and Re A (Children), as they engage fundamental questions for our societty." (p. 817)


UGLOW, Steve, "Necessity";
 

WATT, David, commentator, "Necessity: Justification or Excuse? Perka et al. v. The Queen, unreported, October 11, 1984 (S.C.C.)", Criminal Law Audio Series, 1984,  tape 9, side two, # 2, 6 minutes;
 

WEIN, Bonnie, "The Defence of Necessity: An Examination of  the Rationale" in  National Criminal Law  Program: Substantive Criminal Law, vol. 3, St. John's (Newfoundland):  Federation of Law Societies of  Canada, 1986, pp. B1-B21; research note: this program of substantive criminal Law  is given every two or three years by the Federation of Law Societies of Canada so there is a more recent version but not necessarily by the same author;
 

YEO, Stanley M.H. (Stanley Meng Heong), "Challenging Moral Involuntariness as a Principle of Fundamental Justice", (2002) Queen's Law Journal 335-351; deals
with R. v. Ruzic, [2001] 1 Supreme Court Reports 687;
 

YOUNG, Diana, "Excuses and Intelligibility", (2004) 53 University of New Brunswick Law Journal 79-110, and see in particular, "PART II: Necessity and Duress", at pp. 92-109;
 

C - Case-law / Jurisprudence


Perka v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 232, 1984 CanLII 23 (S.C.C.), available at http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1984/1984scc10007.html (accessed on 30 December 2006); also available in French / aussi disponible en français: Perka c. La Reine, [1984] 2 R.C.S. 232, 1984 IIJCan 23 (C.S.C.), à http://www.canlii.org/ca/jug/csc/1984/1984csc10007.html  (site visité le 30 décembre 2006);


R. c. Casgrain, 2001 IIJCan 16871 (QC C.Q.), disponible à http://www.canlii.org/qc/jug/qccq/2001/2001qccq12330.html (site visité le 8 septembre 2006); j'ai noté cette décision pour son intérêt théorique; dans cet arrêt, il ne semble pas y avoir comparaison d'intérêts ou de biens juridiques différents;R. c. Casgrain, 2001 IIJCan 16871 (QC C.Q.), disponible à http://www.canlii.org/qc/jug/qccq/2001/2001qccq12330.html (site visité le 8 septembre 2006); j'ai noté cette décision pour son intérêt théorique; dans cet arrêt, il ne semble pas y avoir comparaison d'intérêts ou de biens juridiques différents;

R. v. Finta, [1994 1 S.C.R. 701; available at  http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1994/vol1/ (accessed on 24 August 2005); see the judgment of Cory, J.;
 

R. v. Kerr, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 371; available at  http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/fr/pub/2004/vol2/index.html (accessed on 24 August 2005);

"IV. Necessity Is the Appropriate Defence

93     Defence counsel argued at trial and on appeal that Kerr possessed the shanks for the purpose of self-defence and, therefore, did not satisfy the elements of s. 88(1). The lower courts have traditionally found that possessing a weapon for the purpose of self-defence negates the mens rea of s. 88(1). In my view, however, the possession of a weapon for the purpose of defending oneself does not  make that possession lawful. Self-defence does not vitiate the mens rea of an offence, rather it is a justification for conduct that would otherwise attract criminal liability: R. v. Hibbert, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 973, at para. 47. I would go further than this and add that properly conceived it is necessity and not self-defence that would be available to an accused as a defence under s. 88(1).

94  In my opinion, under s. 88(1) an accused who otherwise satisfies the requirements of the offence should be excused from criminal liability where the possession of a weapon is necessary for defending himself. The usual limits on the common law defence of necessity apply. First, the defence of necessity is limited to situations of clear and imminent peril. Thus, necessity would not excuse the possession of a weapon simply because the accused lived in a high-crime neighbourhood or finds      himself among a dangerous prison population. Second, the act must be unavoidable in that the circumstances afford the accused no reasonable opportunity for a legal way out, such as escaping or seeking police protection. Finally, the harm inflicted must be less than the harm sought to be avoided: Perka v. The Queen, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 232, at pp. 251-52.

95  When one raises a defence in answer to a particular offence, the defence must be applied in light of the elements of that offence. Under s. 88(1), actual use of the weapon is not an element of the  crime. Therefore, in considering the third branch of the defence of necessity, the harm inflicted is the breach of s. 88(1), not the actual use of the weapon. In Perka, supra, the harm inflicted was the defendants coming ashore with their cargo of cannabis, in other words, their breach of the prohibitions  on importation of cannabis into Canada and possession of cannabis for the purpose of trafficking. This breach had to be weighed against facing death at sea.

96     The defence of necessity is made out on the facts of this case. On January 16, 2000, Kerr  possessed the weapons to defend himself against an imminent attack by Garon or by other members of the Indian Posse. He had a reasonable belief that the circumstances afforded him no legal way out. And the harm he sought to avoid -- in the words of the trial judge, "a lethal attack" -- outweighed the breach of s. 88(1). On this basis, I would allow the appeal and acquit." (Arbour and LeBel JJ.) (available at  http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/index.html, accessed on 25 September 2004)

R. v. Latimer, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3
R. c. Latimer, [2001] 1 R.C.S. 3 


Morgentaler v. The Queen, [1976] 1 S.C.R. 616, 1975 CanLII 8 (S.C.C.) available at  http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1975/1975scc10007.html (accessed on 30 December 2006); also available in French / aussi disponible en français: Morgentaler c. La Reine, [1976] 1 R.C.S. 616, 1975 IIJCan 8 (C.S.C.), à  http://www.canlii.org/ca/jug/csc/1975/1975csc10007.html (site visité le 30 décembre 2006);

Regina v. Morgentaler (No. 5), (1974) 14 C.C.C. (2d) 459 (Huguessen, A.C.J. Quebec Court of Queen's Bench (Crown Side));  note: the transcripts of the charges to the juries in the first two trials of Dr. Morgentaler should be looked at, as it may possibly contain some important judiciary instructions on the defence of necessity;

"[Translation; Charge to the jury]

    I can summarize the defence of necessity for you, then, in the following wa: the law, in certain circumstances, allows an illegal act, because it is absolutely necessary, to become, by this very fact, legal.  However, the term necessary does not mean preferable, to be wished for, or desirable, but on the contrary, that it is the only solution by which to avoid a disaster to a person's life or health which would otherwise be not only probable but unavoidable."

Re Manitoba Language Rights,  [1985] 1 S.C.R. 721; available at  http://www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/pub/1985/vol1/index.html; deals with State necessity; 

[Home -- Accueil]
[Main Page -- Criminal Law / Page principale -- droit pénal]