My professor says i dont have enough citations and my grammar is the worst in class can some one help me!!
Differences between Civil and Criminal Courts in canada
As a citizen in Canada we ought to understand the justice system that we abide by every day. We as citizens and people of Canada live by the Charter but yet to understand the many key principles of how our court system works. In our justice system there are a quantity principles that how holds up the structure of our justice system and it contributes as weigh system that would balance the public interest and the transparency of our court system to put suspect in proper sentence. Also there are many protections for the court system and regulations that protects it, which would provide assurance that Canadians and everyone would proceed through the justice system in a manner that safeguards to help make certain that no miscarriages of justice would occur.
Throughout the court system of Canada, it regulates procedures and encompasses several different levels court system. Theses courts operate from civil suits to criminal matters. These courts are the provincial courts, superior courts and the Federal Court, the courts of appeal and the Federal Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of Canada. In Canada civil courts takes matters of private of civil issues of the applicant and the defendant in their courts. Also, in civil law the courts abide by the purview of the provincial governments. ( MORISSETTE, 2009) For which most of the province in Canada based on in a case that deals with common or civil law practices. These matters may involve property issues, contract issues, damages and reputation of certain organization would be able to be applied though the civil courts. in addition many other statues fall under the civil law principles such as tort law, contract law, family law, property law, wills and estates, and employment law. Usually In the civil court process, the applicant also known as the plaintiff would ask a court to order the defendant to either pay money for damages or perform specific actions to compensate losses of the plaintiff. These cases would be brought into consideration in the Small Claims Court. The Small claim Court is a division of the Superior Court of Justice of Canada. Yet it deals with civil disputes which are usually claims and losses up to the value of $25,000 ( MORISSETTE, 2009). However it is up to the Deputy Justice to decide on whether they would hear disputes that may involve a higher value. Yet, in the result of any compensation the court would only apply the sum of their maximum value. In various occasion, individuals who are in a civil dispute are able to resolve predicament issues without the continuity towards a trial. However, if a trail is to be started with the procedures of the trail would include pleadings, re examination of the case and the actual trail. Both sides would submit claims and be settle in a further instance.
An example would be the Mahesuram v. Canac Kitchens Ltd., (ON S.C.) case (ON S.C, 2009); Action was conveyed by the plaintiff against the defendant for the wrongful dismissal of the occupation. For fifty-nine years the plaintiff has been employed by the defendant and work for as long as nineteen years and three months at the defendant's company. However the case was that on August 29th 2008 the plaintiff was dismissed from the company without any proper reasoning or any cause. The plaintiff was not notified and became unemployed for approximately four months to the date of the legal battle. According to the defendant, the plaintiff was dismissed from the company due to the recession that affected the company. Which then resulted in termination of some operations in the defendant's manufacturing company. However the plaintiff was offered a partition by the defendant, where the plaintiff rejected due to the lack of notice and result of receiving a partition package to compensate his dismissal. Furthermore, prior to his dismissal the plaintiff had received the equivalent of nineteen weeks pay in the work course of twelve weeks form the defendant. However the Deputy Justice rules that the plaintiff was not given a reasonable notice period prior to his termination. As it should had been approximate 18 months in this case due to the following reasons, the Character of the employment- the plaintiff was required to execute labor for the defendant that required a knowledge base and skill level that exceeds the level of knowledge his position should have, and the length of service- the plaintiff has been an employee of the company for nineteen years, the age of the plaintiff- at the age of 59 the plaintiff would have difficulties in finding similar employment. As a result the defendant must apply eighteen months of salary or one and a half times the plaintiff's annual salary in compensation to the loss of unemployment and for the dismissal without proper notice towards the plaintiff. The Small Claims Court also has simplified rules and procedures which will help guide plaintiffs and defendants through the system very easily due to the nature of the claims. Therefore civil courts are designed to offer a reasonable settlement within the disputes between the individuals according to the rule of law without punishment of the justice system. (ON S.C, 2009)
In the criminal court system its procedures may have similar traits as civil courts due to the system that they are build on. In the Criminal courts of Canada, it involves cases such as criminal acts and unlawful towards the justice system would be tried in the criminal courts. (Michaelk, 2009) Yet, anything that breaches the laws of the criminal code or any disputes that is beyond civil jurisdiction would be held in Criminal courts such as Superior Court of Justice of Ontario. Even civil matters which outweighs civil jurisdiction would be tried through the criminal courts, such as cases that goes beyond $25000s. In Criminal Courts of Canada it would involve the punishment or rehabilitation of offenders in order to protect society. Even though, there are many procedures that the court will go through s in every case, the common procedures that are implemented in the criminal courts are. When an individual is charged, the individual should be presumed innocent until a fair consideration proves on the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual is guilty of the offence. Also known as, "the presumption of innocence until proven guilty". (PRINGLE , 2008)
Secondly in the courts of criminal proceedings the judge may take into consideration of the innocence or guiltiness based on a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof in a proceeding is any indication of evidence that may inculpate or exculpate the accused of the case. In the case of proven guilty the courts will identify the sentencing to be given towards the accused; it can be punishment, deterrence or even rehabilitation. Nevertheless in any criminal case held in criminal courts the Crown prosecutor ought to establish the defendant's culpability as, "beyond a reasonable doubt." As it would then establish the fact that at the end of a proceeding the jury and/or the judge will have reasonable doubt that the defendant is in guilt of an offence.
In the case of R. v. Kennedy, 2008 ONCJ 9 (ONCJ, 2008), the accused is charged with driving under the influence of alcohol with blood alcohol levels 80 milligrams and speeding. The accused was later tested with a breathalyzer back at the station. In the defense the accused suggested that the breathalyzer had false reading and had health symptoms to prove that his breath was falsely taken. Upon the evidence from the police reports showed that the breathalyzer was working properly and the accused does not show any symptoms of health problems. Yet, evidence shows that the accused is a regular drinker. Which then gave a reasonable doubt towards the judge that at the time of the incident the accused did had a blood alcohol concentration of greater than 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 milliliters and was proven guilty. (ONCJ, 2008)
In criminal courts, the crown prosecutor would prove that defendant's guilt is beyond a reasonable doubt and proving the defendant and applying punishment to the case. Also can be describe as prosecution of an case by judge and juries. Also in criminal courts most cases are in violation of either the Charter or the Criminal Code of Canada. Unlike civil courts it is mostly based on private disputes between individuals and organizations. It may involve mattes such as property law, employment law and many common law factors. Civil courts will usually process disputes that may involve loss of property or harm to an individual. It is unlike criminal courts process but instead of punishment plaintiffs and defendants would resolve issues in a compensational method. In addition to differentiate the difference between the criminal courts/law and civil courts/law, criminal laws is generally referred as public law which applies to everyone in our society. Whereas civil courts is be likely referred as private law due to the matters that are usually in between individuals.
Differences between Civil and Criminal Courts in canada
As a citizen in Canada we ought to understand the justice system that we abide by every day. We as citizens and people of Canada live by the Charter but yet to understand the many key principles of how our court system works. In our justice system there are a quantity principles that how holds up the structure of our justice system and it contributes as weigh system that would balance the public interest and the transparency of our court system to put suspect in proper sentence. Also there are many protections for the court system and regulations that protects it, which would provide assurance that Canadians and everyone would proceed through the justice system in a manner that safeguards to help make certain that no miscarriages of justice would occur.
Throughout the court system of Canada, it regulates procedures and encompasses several different levels court system. Theses courts operate from civil suits to criminal matters. These courts are the provincial courts, superior courts and the Federal Court, the courts of appeal and the Federal Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of Canada. In Canada civil courts takes matters of private of civil issues of the applicant and the defendant in their courts. Also, in civil law the courts abide by the purview of the provincial governments. ( MORISSETTE, 2009) For which most of the province in Canada based on in a case that deals with common or civil law practices. These matters may involve property issues, contract issues, damages and reputation of certain organization would be able to be applied though the civil courts. in addition many other statues fall under the civil law principles such as tort law, contract law, family law, property law, wills and estates, and employment law. Usually In the civil court process, the applicant also known as the plaintiff would ask a court to order the defendant to either pay money for damages or perform specific actions to compensate losses of the plaintiff. These cases would be brought into consideration in the Small Claims Court. The Small claim Court is a division of the Superior Court of Justice of Canada. Yet it deals with civil disputes which are usually claims and losses up to the value of $25,000 ( MORISSETTE, 2009). However it is up to the Deputy Justice to decide on whether they would hear disputes that may involve a higher value. Yet, in the result of any compensation the court would only apply the sum of their maximum value. In various occasion, individuals who are in a civil dispute are able to resolve predicament issues without the continuity towards a trial. However, if a trail is to be started with the procedures of the trail would include pleadings, re examination of the case and the actual trail. Both sides would submit claims and be settle in a further instance.
An example would be the Mahesuram v. Canac Kitchens Ltd., (ON S.C.) case (ON S.C, 2009); Action was conveyed by the plaintiff against the defendant for the wrongful dismissal of the occupation. For fifty-nine years the plaintiff has been employed by the defendant and work for as long as nineteen years and three months at the defendant's company. However the case was that on August 29th 2008 the plaintiff was dismissed from the company without any proper reasoning or any cause. The plaintiff was not notified and became unemployed for approximately four months to the date of the legal battle. According to the defendant, the plaintiff was dismissed from the company due to the recession that affected the company. Which then resulted in termination of some operations in the defendant's manufacturing company. However the plaintiff was offered a partition by the defendant, where the plaintiff rejected due to the lack of notice and result of receiving a partition package to compensate his dismissal. Furthermore, prior to his dismissal the plaintiff had received the equivalent of nineteen weeks pay in the work course of twelve weeks form the defendant. However the Deputy Justice rules that the plaintiff was not given a reasonable notice period prior to his termination. As it should had been approximate 18 months in this case due to the following reasons, the Character of the employment- the plaintiff was required to execute labor for the defendant that required a knowledge base and skill level that exceeds the level of knowledge his position should have, and the length of service- the plaintiff has been an employee of the company for nineteen years, the age of the plaintiff- at the age of 59 the plaintiff would have difficulties in finding similar employment. As a result the defendant must apply eighteen months of salary or one and a half times the plaintiff's annual salary in compensation to the loss of unemployment and for the dismissal without proper notice towards the plaintiff. The Small Claims Court also has simplified rules and procedures which will help guide plaintiffs and defendants through the system very easily due to the nature of the claims. Therefore civil courts are designed to offer a reasonable settlement within the disputes between the individuals according to the rule of law without punishment of the justice system. (ON S.C, 2009)
In the criminal court system its procedures may have similar traits as civil courts due to the system that they are build on. In the Criminal courts of Canada, it involves cases such as criminal acts and unlawful towards the justice system would be tried in the criminal courts. (Michaelk, 2009) Yet, anything that breaches the laws of the criminal code or any disputes that is beyond civil jurisdiction would be held in Criminal courts such as Superior Court of Justice of Ontario. Even civil matters which outweighs civil jurisdiction would be tried through the criminal courts, such as cases that goes beyond $25000s. In Criminal Courts of Canada it would involve the punishment or rehabilitation of offenders in order to protect society. Even though, there are many procedures that the court will go through s in every case, the common procedures that are implemented in the criminal courts are. When an individual is charged, the individual should be presumed innocent until a fair consideration proves on the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual is guilty of the offence. Also known as, "the presumption of innocence until proven guilty". (PRINGLE , 2008)
Secondly in the courts of criminal proceedings the judge may take into consideration of the innocence or guiltiness based on a burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof in a proceeding is any indication of evidence that may inculpate or exculpate the accused of the case. In the case of proven guilty the courts will identify the sentencing to be given towards the accused; it can be punishment, deterrence or even rehabilitation. Nevertheless in any criminal case held in criminal courts the Crown prosecutor ought to establish the defendant's culpability as, "beyond a reasonable doubt." As it would then establish the fact that at the end of a proceeding the jury and/or the judge will have reasonable doubt that the defendant is in guilt of an offence.
In the case of R. v. Kennedy, 2008 ONCJ 9 (ONCJ, 2008), the accused is charged with driving under the influence of alcohol with blood alcohol levels 80 milligrams and speeding. The accused was later tested with a breathalyzer back at the station. In the defense the accused suggested that the breathalyzer had false reading and had health symptoms to prove that his breath was falsely taken. Upon the evidence from the police reports showed that the breathalyzer was working properly and the accused does not show any symptoms of health problems. Yet, evidence shows that the accused is a regular drinker. Which then gave a reasonable doubt towards the judge that at the time of the incident the accused did had a blood alcohol concentration of greater than 80 milligrams of alcohol in 100 milliliters and was proven guilty. (ONCJ, 2008)
In criminal courts, the crown prosecutor would prove that defendant's guilt is beyond a reasonable doubt and proving the defendant and applying punishment to the case. Also can be describe as prosecution of an case by judge and juries. Also in criminal courts most cases are in violation of either the Charter or the Criminal Code of Canada. Unlike civil courts it is mostly based on private disputes between individuals and organizations. It may involve mattes such as property law, employment law and many common law factors. Civil courts will usually process disputes that may involve loss of property or harm to an individual. It is unlike criminal courts process but instead of punishment plaintiffs and defendants would resolve issues in a compensational method. In addition to differentiate the difference between the criminal courts/law and civil courts/law, criminal laws is generally referred as public law which applies to everyone in our society. Whereas civil courts is be likely referred as private law due to the matters that are usually in between individuals.