Vertaling van "ontario courts inquiry " (Engels → Frans) :

TERMINOLOGIE

Ontario Courts Inquiry
Commission d'enquête sur les tribunaux de l'Ontario

Report of the Ontario Courts Inquiry
Rapport de l'enquête sur le fonctionnement des tribunaux de l'Ontario

Ontario Court of Justice Criminal Proceedings Rules [ Ontario Supreme Court Rules Respecting Criminal Proceedings - Part I | Ontario Supreme Court Rules Respecting Pre-hearing Conferences in Criminal Matters | Ontario District Court Rules Respecting Pre-hearing Conferences in Criminal Matters | Ontario County and ]
Règles de procédure en matière criminelle de la Cour de justice de l'Ontario [ Règles concernant les poursuites criminelles de la Cour suprême de l'Ontario - Partie I | Règles de la Cour suprême de l'Ontario concernant les conférences préparatoires en matière criminelle | Règles de la Cour de district de l'Ontario concernant les confére ]

Court of Inquiry
Conseil d'Enquête

board of inquiry | court of enquiry
commission d'enquête

The Court may at any time...order...that a previous inquiry be...expanded
La Cour...peut,à tout moment,...prescrire...l'ampliation de tout acte d'instruction

IN-CONTEXT TRANSLATIONS

Despite recent reports from Elections Canada, the ruling of Mr. Justice Mosley to the Ontario court leaves many questions unanswered, and an inquiry is called for.
C'est ce qu'on a appelé le scandale des appels automatisés. Malgré les récents rapports produits par Élections Canada, la décision du juge Mosley, de la Cour de l'Ontario, laisse beaucoup de questions sans réponses.

I refer the honourable senator to the report of the Commissioner of the Walkerton Inquiry, the Honourable Dennis R. O'Connor, Justice of the Ontario Court of Appeal, who was specifically mandated by the provincial government to examine the provincial problem with respect to water and water regulation.
Je renvoie le sénateur au rapport du commissaire de la Commission d'enquête sur les événements de Walkerton, l'honorable Dennis R. O'Connor, juge à la Cour d'appel de l'Ontario, que le gouvernement provincial a chargé spécialement d'examiner le problème provincial concernant l'eau et la réglementation des eaux.

The Ontario-based Criminal Lawyers’ Association (CLA) supports certain initiatives in the bill – such as facilitation of electronic filing of documents and remote court appearances, establishing a guilty plea inquiry procedure, and enabling Attorneys General more flexibility in intervening in private prosecutions – and does not take issue with the notion of requiring advance notice of expert testimony (27) However, both the CLA and the Association in Defence of the Wrongfully Convicted (AIDWYC) oppose any new restrictions on the availability of preliminary inquiries (28) These groups believe that, in addition to its principal function of screening out or reducing charges which the evidence does not support, the preliminary inquiry continues to perform a useful role in permitting the accused to obtain further information, assess the strength of witnesses, and generally test the strength of the prosecution’s case before trial (29) In fact, the CLA advocates enhancing the screening role of the preliminary inquiry by raising the standard for committing an accused for trial and enabling the inquiry judge to weigh evidence and exclude evidence which would not be admissible at trial (30)
La Criminal Lawyers’ Association (CLA) de l’Ontario appuie certaines initiatives du projet de loi – facilitation du dépôt électronique de documents et de la comparution à distance devant le tribunal, établissement d’une procédure d’enquête relative au plaidoyer de culpabilité et plus grande possibilité d’intervention des procureurs généraux dans les poursuites privées – et ne conteste pas la notion d’exiger préavis de témoignage d’expert(27). Toutefois, et la CLA et l’Association in Defence of the Wrongfully Convicted s’opposent à toute nouvelle restriction de la possibilité d’enquêtes préliminaires(28).

The Ontario-based Criminal Lawyers’ Association (CLA) supports certain initiatives in the bill – such as facilitation of electronic filing of documents and remote court appearances, establishing a guilty plea inquiry procedure, and enabling Attorneys General more flexibility in intervening in private prosecutions – and does not take issue with the notion of requiring advance notice of expert testimony (67) However, both the CLA and the Association in Defence of the Wrongfully Convicted (AIDWYC) oppose any new restrictions on the availability of preliminary inquiries (68) These groups believe that, in addition to its principal function of screening out or reducing charges which the evidence does not support, the preliminary inquiry continues to perform a useful role in permitting the accused to obtain further information, assess the strength of witnesses, and generally test the strength of the prosecution’s case before trial (69) In fact, the CLA advocates enhancing the screening role of the preliminary inquiry by raising the standard for committing an accused for trial and enabling the inquiry judge to weigh evidence and exclude evidence which would not be admissible at trial (70)
La Criminal Lawyers’ Association (CLA) de l’Ontario appuie certaines initiatives du projet de loi – facilitation du dépôt électronique de documents et de la comparution à distance devant le tribunal, établissement d’une procédure d’enquête relative au plaidoyer de culpabilité et plus grande possibilité d’intervention des procureurs généraux dans les poursuites privées – et ne conteste pas la notion d’exiger préavis de témoignage d’expert(67). Toutefois, et la CLA et l’Association in Defence of the Wrongfully Convicted s’opposent à toute nouvelle restriction de la possibilité d’enquêtes préliminaires(68).

In addition, on July 13, 1995, I also spoke on these false accusations in my inquiry on the Ontario Civil Justice Review and again on November 23, 1995, in my inquiry on the Hill v. Church of Scientology Supreme Court of Canada decision.
De plus, le 13 juillet 1995, j'ai également parlé des fausses accusations dans mon interpellation sur le rapport Civil Justice Review, en Ontario, et à nouveau le 23 novembre 1995, dans mon interpellation sur la décision de la Cour suprême du Canada dans l'affaire Hill c. l'Église de scientologie.