Haggart had an exchange of angry words with Jules Jobidon, a young man at the bar with his brother.

At trial, the judge found that though Jobidon did not intend to kill him, the possibility of serious injury was foreseeable.

Justice Gonthier, writing for the majority, held that the criminal law has a "paternalistic" dimension which attempts to ensure that all "citizens treat each other humanely and with respect".

Nevertheless, consent would be a valid defence where the harm was trivial or where it is part of a socially valuable activity such as sports.

This fact led Justice Sopinka to concur with the initial trial judge by stating that the victim lacked the agency to consent to the fight once he was knocked unconscious, and therefore, Jobidon could not use consent as a defence and was guilty of manslaughter by the unlawful act of assault.