In 1986, David Edwin Oakes was charged with the possession of illicit drugs with the intent to traffic; Oakes contested that s. 8 of the Narcotic Control Act contravened and violated the presumption of innocence under s.11 of the Charter. The defendant questioned the validity of s. 8 of the Narcotic Control Act- as this
and that the defendants absent to establish the contrary, will result in conviction with the intent to traffic. Furthermore, on February 28th 1986, both the trial and appeal court judges
The Ontario Court of Appeal raised the notion that reverse onus in s. 8 of the Narcotic Control Act was unconstitutional. However
Alternatively
The Supreme Court acknowledged that it will become imperative
To conclude, the court found
and that the defendants absent to establish the contrary, will result in conviction with the intent to traffic. Furthermore, on February 28th 1986, both the trial and appeal court judges
The Ontario Court of Appeal raised the notion that reverse onus in s. 8 of the Narcotic Control Act was unconstitutional. However
Alternatively
The Supreme Court acknowledged that it will become imperative
To conclude, the court found