R v O'Connor

R v O'Connor
Supreme Court of Canada
Hearing: 1995: February 1; Judgment: 1995: December 14.
Citations	[1995] 4 SCR 411
Docket No.	24114
Prior history	APPEAL from the COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA
Ruling	Appeal dismissed
Court membership
Reasons given
Majority	La Forest, L'Heureux-Dube, Gonthier and McLachlin JJ.
Concurrence	Cory and Iacobucci JJ
Dissent	Lamer C.J. and Sopinka and Major JJ.

R v O'Connor, [1995] 4 S.C.R. 411 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on disclosure of medical records. O’Connor was accused of and charged with rape and indecent assault of four women.^[1] The Court held that the medical and counselling records of a complainant in a sexual assault case that are held by a third party can be disclosed by order of the judge if they meet two requirements.

First, the applicant must establish, without seeing them, that the records are likely to be relevant to the case. Second, the judge must review the records and decide whether to disclose them based on the balancing the right to make full answer and defence, and the right to privacy.

The O'Connor involved in the case was Hubert Patrick O'Connor, a Catholic bishop from British Columbia who was found guilty of sex crimes in 1991.^[2]

See also[]

• List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Lamer Court)
• R v Mills (1999)

References[]

External links[]

• Full text of Supreme Court of Canada decision at LexUM

This article about Canadian law is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by .

• v
• t