section 551.7(10)


This section states that a judge adjudicates the issue at trial.


551.7(10) When the judge adjudicates the issue, he or she is doing so at trial.


Section 551.7(10) of the Criminal Code of Canada refers to the process of adjudicating an issue at trial. When a judge is asked to make a decision on a matter related to the trial - such as the admissibility of evidence, the relevance of a witness's testimony, or the applicability of a particular law - they are said to be adjudicating the issue. This involves listening to arguments from both sides and weighing the evidence before making a ruling. The purpose of this section is to clarify that when a judge is adjudicating an issue, they are doing so within the context of the trial, rather than in isolation. In other words, all decisions made by the judge must be based on the evidence presented at trial, and must be in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations. This section also highlights the importance of judicial impartiality. When adjudicating an issue at trial, judges must remain unbiased and impartial, and must base their decisions solely on the facts and evidence presented, rather than on personal beliefs or biases. This ensures that the trial is fair and that both the prosecution and the defense receive a fair hearing. In summary, section 551.7(10) clarifies the role of the judge in adjudicating issues at trial, and emphasizes the importance of impartiality and fairness in the judicial process.


Section 551.7(10) of the Criminal Code of Canada is concerned with the adjudication of issues at trial. The provision sets out the manner in which a judge must adjudicate issues that arise during a trial that is ongoing. According to the section, when a judge is adjudicating an issue, he or she is doing so at trial. The provision is significant because it outlines the specific context in which a judge is to make decisions during a criminal trial. The fact that the adjudication is done at trial implies that the decision must be made based on the evidence that has been presented in court. In other words, a judge cannot make a decision based on information that is presented outside of the courtroom. The judge must base his or her decision on the facts and evidence that are brought to light in court. It is also noteworthy that the provision specifies that it is the judge who is to adjudicate the issue. This is important because it establishes the judge as the ultimate authority in the trial. It is the judge who is responsible for ensuring that the trial is conducted fairly and that the rules of evidence are adhered to. As such, the provision gives the judge broad powers to make decisions that are necessary for the proper administration of justice. Another point to consider is that the provision does not specify what type of issues the judge may be called upon to adjudicate. The language of the provision is broad and could apply to any number of issues that may arise during a trial. For example, the judge may be asked to rule on the admissibility of certain evidence, or to decide whether a particular witness is competent to testify. The provision leaves it up to the judge's discretion to determine what issues need to be adjudicated in order to ensure a fair and just trial. In conclusion, Section 551.7(10) of the Criminal Code of Canada plays an important role in establishing the framework for adjudicating issues at trial. By specifying that the judge must make decisions based on evidence presented in court, the provision ensures that the trial remains fair and impartial. It also gives the judge broad powers to make decisions that are necessary for the proper administration of justice. Ultimately, the provision provides a foundation for the proper conduct of a criminal trial in Canada.


Section 551.7(10) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with adjudicating issues at trial. It is a critical section for defense lawyers, and they need to consider various strategies while dealing with it. Some of the key strategic considerations are as follows. First and foremost, defense lawyers need to ensure that they are prepared to present a strong case at trial. They must understand all of the evidence and legal issues involved, and they should be able to articulate their arguments clearly and concisely. Additionally, they need to have a solid understanding of Section 551.7(10) and how it impacts their client's case. One potential strategy for dealing with this section is to argue that the judge should not be adjudicating the issue at trial. Instead, the defense lawyer could argue that the issue should be resolved prior to trial through a pretrial motion or a preliminary inquiry. This strategy may be effective if the issue is sufficiently complex or controversial and would require a significant amount of time and resources to address at trial. Another strategy that could be employed is to challenge the admissibility of evidence related to the issue in question. For example, if the issue concerns the reliability of eyewitness testimony, the defense lawyer could challenge the admissibility of any eyewitness testimony that the Crown intends to offer. This strategy may be effective if the defense lawyer can demonstrate that the evidence in question is unreliable or lacks probative value. Another possible strategy is to argue that the judge should reserve judgment on the issue until the end of the trial. This strategy may be useful if the issue is not central to the case, or if there is a risk that adjudicating the issue prematurely could prejudice the defense. Finally, defense lawyers should consider the possibility of appealing any adverse ruling on the issue. If the judge adjudicates the issue in a manner that is unfavorable to the defense, the lawyer may be able to argue on appeal that the judge erred in applying Section 551.7(10) or in the way they adjudicated the issue. In conclusion, Section 551.7(10) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an essential section for defense lawyers to understand. They need to consider various strategic considerations when dealing with it, such as challenging the admissibility of evidence, arguing that the issue should be resolved before trial, reserving judgment on the issue, and appealing any adverse rulings. Ultimately, the goal is to ensure that their client receives a fair trial and is protected by the rule of law.