Canadian appellate courts usually deal with harmless error (usually an evidentiary ruling by a trial judge that, while mistaken, does not meet the standard of reversible error on appeal, or to warrant a new trial) in
the context of criminal trials.
Without being exhaustive, the danger to the administration of justice is likely to be at its most acute in
the context of criminal trials e.g., where witnesses who are out of court may be informed of what has already happened in court and so coached or briefed before they then give evidence, or where information posted on, for instance, Twitter about inadmissible evidence may influence members of a jury.
Not exact matches
2012 Arming and Disarming: A History
of Gun Control in Canada by R. Blake Brown Property on
Trial: Canadian Cases in
Context edited by Eric Tucker, James Muir & Bruce Ziff \ Broken Grounds:
Criminal Law on the Aboriginal Plains, 1870 - 1905 by Shelley Gavigan The African - Canadians Legal Odyssey: Selected Essays edited by Barrington Walker
He discussed the decisions
of the Supreme Court
of Canada in Head v. the Queen, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 684 and R.v. Burke (2002), 164 C.C.C. (3d) 385, which both involved the application
of the doctrine in the
context of criminal jury
trials.
«Indeed, many
of the advantages
of public
criminal trials are equally applicable in the civil
trial context....
Criminal Law: I.D; Photographs; Confessions R. v. Araya, 2015 SCC 11 (35669)
Trial judge's instructions here were «adequate», and though not perfectly phrased, the totality
of the instructions, viewed in the
context of the case as a whole, adequately guarded against the possibility
of jurors using the photographs for «impermissible reasoning».
«This final report is a precursor to what is hoped will be new
criminal rules dealing with challenge for cause procedures in the
context of criminal jury
trials.
In terms
of substantive issues, the Court needed to determine the appropriate implementation and use
of the new war crime legislation, particularly how a
trial judge must instruct himself or a jury on the correct legal requirements
of such a charge in the
context of criminal law principles.
However, courts have noted that in a
criminal context, rules
of privilege may be relaxed after a
trial as the client no longer has an interest in preserving the confidentiality
of the information.