Ce qu'est la défense d'apparence de droit selon la Cour d'appel de Colombie-Britannique

R. v. Soranno, 2024 BCCA 5

Lien vers la décision

[111]   This was a case where the known facts did not lend themselves to a colour of right defence.  

[112]   The term “colour of right” means an honest belief in a state of facts which at law, if those facts existed, would justify or excuse the act done: R. v. DeMarco, 13 C.C.C. (2d) 369 at 372, 1973 CanLII 1542 (Ont. C.A.). It is distinct from having a moral conviction that one is justified in breaking a law.

[113]   On an earlier ruling, the judge noted that Ms. Soranno had acknowledged in a voir dire that the activities of the protesters that day were criminal in nature, but she maintained they were morally justified: Voir Dires No. 4 and No. 5, 2022 BCSC 714 at para. 129. This would suggest that early on the appellants were not planning to advance a colour of right defence.

[114]   The accused did not testify, and so there is no evidence that they believed they had a legal right to break into this private property and occupy it.