< <
section 268(1)
> >
ALPHABETICAL LISTING NUMERICAL LISTING CATEGORICAL LISTING

SECTION WORDING
268(1) Every one commits an aggravated assault who wounds, maims, disfigures or endangers the life of the complainant.

RELATED CASES
R. v. BearAccused convicted of common assault after spitting in the face of arresting police officer. The charge was upgraded upon appeal to attempted aggravated assault due to the fact that the accused had threatened to transmit his HIV infection via spit before proceeding to spit on the officer. The officer did not contract HIV, as such it was not an aggravated assault but an attempt.
R. v. CarriereCarriere was charged with aggravated assault after being found to have stabbed another woman in the abdomen. The accused argued that she should not be charged with aggravated assault as the complainant had agreed to a knife fight. The court found that separate from consenting to assault, one cannot consent to being stabbed. As such, the accused was found guilty of aggravated assault.
R. v. GodinThe accused was charged with aggravated assault after bringing a baby to the hospital where they found a traumatic head injury upon examination. His defence was that he panicked when the child started choking on medication that he had administered, and in the resulting chaos he had accidentally banged the childs head. Despite having no intention to maim the child, the fact that the maiming occurred was enough to find the accused guilty of aggravated assault.
R. v. LittletentThe accused was charged with aggravated assault for attacking a corrections officer while incarcerated. The defence argued that the perforation of the complainants eardrum was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be a result of the assault, and therefore it should be a common assault, as the threshold for wounding (the breaking of skin) was not met. The courts decided that there would be no other reasonable cause for the perforated eardrum other than as a result of the assault, and as such the accused was convicted of aggravated assault.
R. v. WilliamsThe accused and the complainant were in an ongoing sexual relationship. Six months into their relationship, the accused found out that he was HIV positive. Despite receiving counselling on safe-sex practices and the requirement of disclosure to partners, he continued to have unprotected sex with the complainant. Originally charged with aggravated assault, the accused was convicted of attempted aggravated assault because the complainant could not be proven to have contracted the virus after the accused had found out.

RELATED LINKS
reasonable-doubtAn overview of the legal concept of "reasonable doubt."





(C) Copyright 2016 - Site maintained by https://www.paullewandowski.com