英文字典中文字典


英文字典中文字典51ZiDian.com



中文字典辞典   英文字典 a   b   c   d   e   f   g   h   i   j   k   l   m   n   o   p   q   r   s   t   u   v   w   x   y   z       







请输入英文单字，中文词皆可：


请选择你想看的字典辞典：
单词字典翻译
sheetings查看　sheetings　在百度字典中的解释百度英翻中〔查看〕
sheetings查看　sheetings　在Google字典中的解释Google英翻中〔查看〕
sheetings查看　sheetings　在Yahoo字典中的解释Yahoo英翻中〔查看〕

安装中文字典英文字典查询工具!


中文字典英文字典工具:
选择颜色:
输入中英文单字

































































英文字典中文字典相关资料:


  • 1999 CanLII 674 (SCC) | Smith v. Jones | CanLII
    Regents of University of California, 551 P 2d 334 (1976), the Supreme Court of California considered whether psychologists and psychiatrists have a duty to warn a potential victim when they were or should have been aware that a patient presented a serious danger to an identifiable person
  • Case Summary - Smith v Jones | CanLII Connects
    §The judge setting aside the solicitor-client privilege should strive to strictly limit disclosure to those aspects of the report or document which indicate that there is an imminent risk of serious bodily harm or death to an identifiable person or group
  • Smith v. Jones - SCC Cases - Supreme Court of Canada
    Date modified: 2026-06-12 Resources
  • Smith v Jones - Wikipedia
    Smith v Jones is a 1999 judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada that was decided on appeal from the British Columbia Court of Appeal [1] The Appellant sought to keep secret the professional opinion of the Respondent, a psychologist, whom the former had retained as part of his trial for aggravated assault of a prostitute
  • The Duty to Warn – When Can a Physician Breach Patient Confidentiality . . .
    The court referred to Smith v Jones and concluded that it may support a conclusion that one or both of the defendants were justified in releasing confidential information about Bradley’s condition to his parents or to the police, on the basis of public safety However, it did not go as far as to establish a duty to warn on the part of the defendant physicians The court noted that the duty
  • Canadian Landmark Case, Smith v. Jones, Supreme Court of Canada . . .
    The recent decision of the Supreme Court of Canada titled Smith v Jones has made major changes to the way forensic psy- chiatry may be practiced in Canada and may have implications for other jurisdic- tions as well ' This decision has made major inroads into the limitations of priv- ileged communication and confidentiality between a criminal defendant and the fo- rensic psychiatrist retained
  • Does a Health Professional have a Duty to Warn?
    Would a reasonable person, given all the facts, consider the potential danger to be clear, serious, and imminent? The following factors are to be considered by the court in making its determination: There is a clear risk to an identifiable person or group of persons; The risk is one of serious bodily harm or death; The danger is imminent
  • Canadian landmark case, Smith v. Jones, supreme court of Canada . . .
    The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed public safety can override solicitor-client privilege in Smith v Jones The ruling broadens the definitions of 'intended victim' to identifiable groups at risk Imminence of risk is now defined by a 'sense of urgency' rather than strict time limits Psychiatrists face an expanded duty to disclose potentially dangerous individuals, impacting confidentiality
  • Microsoft Word - Duty to Warn
    At some point the need to protect the public from imminent danger becomes paramount, and at that point the doctor’s duty of confidentiality ends and is replaced by a duty to warn the person or persons at risk (1996, p 34) In 1999 the Supreme Court of Canada, in the case of Smith v
  • 6. When does the duty to report override the duty of confidentiality
    The information that is unrelated to the imminent risk of serious bodily harm or death to an identifiable person or group should be redacted Documentation The Model Code states that if the lawyer has disclosed client information to protect the safety of the public or an individual, they should document the following as soon as possible:
  • When to disclose confidential information - CMPA
    Canadian courts have not expressly imposed a mandatory “duty to warn” on physicians to alert third parties of a danger posed by patients However, the Supreme Court of Canada has held that a physician is permitted to warn police when aware of a serious, imminent danger posed by a patient to an identifiable person or group against whom the





中文字典-英文字典  2005-2009