Today we bring you Part II of our 3-part release of R v Goldfinch. We have the concurring decision of Moldaver J (with Rowe J concurring), who agreed in outcome, but felt that a "friends with benefits" relationship could be relevant in certain circumstances - just not the current circumstances before the court.
Legal Listening - Where Audio Obiter is Our Thing!
Link to Decision: https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2019/2019scc38/2019scc38.html?autocompleteStr=R%20v%20Goldfinch&autocompletePos=1)
We're now on Patreon! Become a patron, unlock fun bonus content, and support the project here: patreon.com/LegalListening )
Check us out at legallistening.com, look for us on CanLii Connects, find us on twitter @legallistening or email us at [email protected]
While you're here, check out our team!
Julie Lundy: https://www.julielundyart.com/)
Rad & Kel: https://www.radandkell.com/)
Remember we're always looking for guest readers to come on the podcast. Have a decision you love? Want to see it recorded? Reach out!
