INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
A decision that is changed or replaced under this section will be treated as if it was the original decision for enforcement purposes.
SECTION WORDING
680(3) A decision as varied or substituted under this section shall have effect and may be enforced in all respects as though it were the decision originally made.
EXPLANATION
Section 680(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the provision of varying or substituting an earlier decision made under this section. Essentially, it means that if a decision is changed or replaced under this section, the new decision will have the same effect and may be enforced in the same manner as the original decision. A decision made under section 680 of the Criminal Code of Canada refers to a decision in a criminal trial that relates to a person's fitness to stand trial, the disposition of a person found not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial, a finding of guilt, or a penalty. This section gives the court the power to reconsider and change its previous decision if certain conditions are met. If a decision is varied or substituted, the new decision must be treated as if it were the original decision, and all parties involved must comply with it. This means that the decision can be enforced in the same manner as the original decision, and the court can take action against anyone who fails to comply. In essence, Section 680(3) strengthens the power of the court to maintain its authority in criminal trials. It allows the court to revisit its earlier decisions if necessary and to enforce those decisions so that justice can be served. This provision also ensures that the final ruling in a criminal case is upheld and respected.
COMMENTARY
Section 680(3) of the Canadian Criminal Code deals with the powers of appeal courts to vary or substitute decisions made by lower courts. The section ensures that any decisions made by an appellate court under this circumstance will have full effect and may be enforced in the same way as if it were the original decision. This means that the decision will be deemed final and authoritative, and all parties to a case will be required to abide by it. The purpose of this section is to ensure that the judicial system functions efficiently and that the rule of law is upheld. By giving appellate courts the power to vary or substitute decisions, it allows them to correct any errors made by lower courts and ensure that justice is served. This creates confidence in the justice system as a whole, and helps to promote the integrity and fairness of legal proceedings. When a decision is varied or substituted under this section, it means that the appellate court has made changes to the lower court's decision. These changes may include reducing or increasing the sentence, quashing the conviction, or giving a new verdict. The decision made by the appellate court is considered to be final, and no further appeal will be permitted. The fact that the decision may be enforced in all respects as though it were the decision originally made" is significant. This clause ensures that the decision made by the appellate court will be treated by all parties in the same way as the original decision made by the lower court. This prevents any confusion or ambiguity, as no one will be unclear about how to apply the decision or what it means. It's worth noting that Section 680(3) only applies to variations or substitutions made by appellate courts. It does not apply to decisions made by lower courts, which are subject to their own set of rules and procedures. In conclusion, Section 680(3) of the Canadian Criminal Code is a crucial provision in upholding the rule of law and ensuring that justice is served. It gives appellate courts the power to correct decisions made by lower courts, and ensures that their decisions are treated with the same authority and finality as the original decisions. This promotes confidence in the legal system and helps to ensure that justice is served fairly and efficiently.
STRATEGY
Section 680(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that allows parties to potentially appeal or vary an existing decision made in a criminal case. This section provides a mechanism for parties to request a review of the case or decision made, and potentially have the decision overturned or modified. In terms of strategic considerations when dealing with this section, one important factor to consider is timing. Appeals or reviews under section 680(3) must be submitted within a specific timeframe, depending on the nature of the decision being appealed. Failing to meet these deadlines can result in the application being rejected without consideration. Another important consideration is the strength of the case or argument being made. Parties seeking to appeal or vary a decision will need to provide evidence and arguments that are persuasive and compelling, and that suggest that the original decision was incorrect or unfair in some way. This can require detailed legal analysis and research, and may require the assistance of legal counsel. One strategy that parties may employ when dealing with section 680(3) is to focus on identifying potential errors or flaws in the original decision. This might involve reviewing the legal reasoning or factual findings made by the original decision-maker, and identifying issues or inconsistencies that can be used to support the case for an appeal or review. Another strategy is to focus on gathering additional evidence or expert opinions that can help to support the argument for overturning the initial decision. This might involve engaging expert witnesses or conducting additional research to identify new or previously undiscovered information that could have a significant impact on the case. Overall, there are a number of strategic considerations to keep in mind when dealing with section 680(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada. By carefully reviewing the relevant legal requirements and crafting persuasive arguments that address the issues at stake, parties can improve their chances of success when appealing or varying a criminal decision.