Manslaughter
In Canadian criminal law, manslaughter is defined under Section 222 of the Criminal Code. It occupies a middle ground between murder and criminal negligence causing death.
Definition (Section 222 Criminal Code)
Manslaughter is unlawfully causing the death of a human being, whether by:
Intentional act without premeditation (not meeting murder criteria), or
Criminal negligence or unlawful act causing death.
It is usually treated as less culpable than murder because:
It lacks malice aforethought, and/or
It results from recklessness or negligence rather than planning or deliberate intent.
Types of Manslaughter in Canada
Voluntary Manslaughter (Provocation / Loss of Self-Control)
The accused intentionally kills but does so in the heat of passion caused by provocation.
Example: Killing in response to a sudden physical attack or extreme insult.
Involuntary Manslaughter
Death results from:
Unlawful act manslaughter (actus reus is an unlawful act, mens rea is not intent to kill)
Criminal negligence manslaughter (failure to take reasonable care causing death)
Constructive Manslaughter
Killing occurs during the commission of another unlawful act (e.g., assault, battery), even if death was unintended.
Penalties
Maximum life imprisonment, depending on circumstances.
The degree of culpability affects sentencing.
Courts consider aggravating/mitigating factors, including:
Criminal history,
Degree of recklessness,
Provocation,
Abuse of authority.
CASE LAW ON MANSLAUGHTER
Here are six important Canadian manslaughter cases explained in detail:
1. R. v. Smith (1961, Supreme Court of Canada)
Key Issue: Causation in manslaughter – whether the defendant’s act must be the “substantial cause” of death.
Facts:
The accused stabbed the victim in a fight. The victim received medical care, but doctors negligently failed to treat him properly, and he died.
Holding:
The Court held that even if medical treatment is negligent, the original wound remains a significant contributing cause.
The test for manslaughter is whether the act was a “substantial and operating cause” of death.
Importance:
Establishes the causation principle: intervening events rarely absolve an accused unless they break the chain completely.
Still cited in modern manslaughter cases to assess liability when multiple factors contribute to death.
2. R. v. Creighton (1993, Supreme Court of Canada)
Key Issue: Definition of criminal negligence in manslaughter.
Facts:
The accused supplied drugs (cocaine) to a friend, who overdosed and died.
Holding:
The Court clarified that criminal negligence requires a marked and substantial departure from the standard of care a reasonable person would observe, which creates a risk of death or serious bodily harm.
Mere carelessness or moral blameworthiness is not enough; the conduct must be objectively dangerous.
Importance:
Defines objective standard for negligence-based manslaughter.
Frequently applied in cases of reckless driving, occupational negligence, or unsafe acts leading to death.
3. R. v. Boudreault (2012, Supreme Court of Canada)
Key Issue: Sentencing principles in manslaughter.
Facts:
Accused assaulted the victim with a firearm, causing death. Convicted of manslaughter.
Dispute focused on appropriate sentence and aggravating factors.
Holding:
Court emphasized that sentencing must balance:
Denunciation and deterrence,
Rehabilitation, and
Proportionality to moral blameworthiness.
Importance:
Highlights that manslaughter sentencing depends on context, including:
Intent,
Recklessness,
Whether death occurred during another unlawful act.
4. R. v. Thibert (2014, Alberta Court of Appeal)
Key Issue: Manslaughter and provocation.
Facts:
Accused killed his partner during a heated argument provoked by extreme verbal and physical abuse.
Argued that provocation should reduce the offence to manslaughter from murder.
Holding:
Court held that provocation can reduce murder to manslaughter, but:
Must be sudden and grave,
Ordinary person standard applies,
Cooling-off period affects evaluation.
Importance:
Clarifies the role of emotional disturbance and loss of self-control in voluntary manslaughter.
5. R. v. Jobidon (1991, Supreme Court of Canada)
Key Issue: Voluntary manslaughter and consent to violence.
Facts:
A consensual fight between two men led to one’s death. The accused argued consent to fight negated liability.
Holding:
The Court rejected the consent defense:
Consent cannot be given to serious bodily harm resulting in death,
Accused convicted of manslaughter.
Importance:
Established that consent is not a defense to violent acts causing death, a key principle for voluntary manslaughter cases arising from fights.
6. R. v. Cey (2019, Ontario Court of Appeal)
Key Issue: Constructive manslaughter and unlawful act.
Facts:
Accused set a small fire as a prank. Fire spread, killing a neighbor.
Holding:
Court held that unlawful act manslaughter does not require intent to kill:
It suffices that the act was dangerous and likely to cause harm,
The death resulted from the act.
Importance:
Reinforces the concept of constructive or unlawful act manslaughter, commonly applied in cases involving reckless or illegal acts.
7. R. v. Khan and Khan (1998, Supreme Court of Canada)
Key Issue: Manslaughter due to criminal negligence in professional context.
Facts:
Doctors failed to provide adequate care, leading to a patient’s death.
Charged with criminal negligence causing death.
Holding:
Court emphasized:
Marked departure from reasonable professional standards,
Must create risk of death or serious harm.
Importance:
Applied in cases of medical manslaughter, construction safety, and other professional negligence.
KEY PRINCIPLES FROM CASE LAW
Causation – The accused’s act must be a substantial and operating cause of death (Smith).
Criminal negligence – Must be marked and substantial departure from the reasonable person standard (Creighton, Khan).
Provocation – May reduce murder to voluntary manslaughter if sudden and grave (Thibert).
Unlawful acts – Constructive manslaughter arises from committing a dangerous unlawful act even without intent to kill (Cey).
Consent – Cannot be a defense to serious bodily harm resulting in death (Jobidon).
RELATED Blog
comments