All Practice Exams
100+ Free NCA Criminal Law Practice Questions
NCA Canadian Criminal Law Examination practice questions are available now; exam metadata is being verified.
✓ No registration✓ No credit card✓ No hidden fees✓ Start practicing immediately
Varies by sitting Pass Rate
100+ Questions
100% Free
1 / 100
Question 1
Score: 0/0
An accused honestly but mistakenly believes he has a legal right to take a bicycle he finds, thinking it is the one stolen from him. He takes it; in fact it belongs to someone else. He is charged with theft. How does the concept of 'colour of right' apply?
A
B
C
D
to track
Same family resources
Explore More NCA Canadian Law Exams
Continue into nearby exams from the same family. Each card keeps practice questions, study guides, flashcards, videos, and articles in one place.
2026 Statistics
Key Facts: NCA Criminal Law Exam
50%
Pass Mark
Federation of Law Societies of Canada (NCA)
3 hours
Exam Duration (open-book)
NCA exam information
3-4
Essay / Short-Answer Questions
NCA exam information
CAD $500 + tax
Exam Fee (per exam)
NCA Costs and Timelines (2025+)
Online-proctored
Delivery Mode
NCA exam information
100+
Practice Questions Here
OpenExamPrep question bank
The NCA Canadian Criminal Law Examination is a 3-hour, open-book, online-proctored exam with 3-4 fact-based essay/short-answer questions and a 50% pass mark, administered by the National Committee on Accreditation (NCA) of the Federation of Law Societies of Canada. The fee is CAD $500 plus applicable taxes per exam. The syllabus covers general principles (actus reus, mens rea, strict and absolute liability under R. v. Sault Ste. Marie), modes of participation (ss. 21-22), inchoate offences, specific offences (homicide ss. 229-231, sexual assault and consent under R. v. Ewanchuk, theft and fraud), defences (self-defence s. 34, necessity, duress R. v. Ryan, intoxication R. v. Daviault, mental disorder s. 16, automatism), Charter rights in the criminal process (s. 8 search, s. 10 counsel, s. 11(b) under R. v. Jordan, s. 24(2) exclusion under R. v. Grant), and sentencing. Candidates must bring a hard-copy annotated Criminal Code. These 100 multiple-choice questions are knowledge-prep, not the essay format of the real exam.
Sample NCA Criminal Law Practice Questions
Try these sample questions to test your NCA Criminal Law exam readiness. Each question includes a detailed explanation. Start the interactive quiz above for the full 100+ question experience with AI tutoring.
1A provincial legislature enacts a statute making it an offence, punishable by imprisonment, to operate a tattoo parlour without a provincial health licence. A challenger argues the province lacked authority to create this offence. Which constitutional provision authorizes the province to enact this offence?
A.Section 92(13) and the province's power over property and civil rights / matters of a local nature
B.Section 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867 (the federal criminal law power)
C.Section 9 of the Criminal Code abolishing common law offences
D.Section 33 of the Charter (the notwithstanding clause)
Explanation: Only the federal Parliament may create 'true crimes' under s. 91(27) of the Constitution Act, 1867. Provinces may nonetheless create regulatory offences (and back them with imprisonment) under their own heads of power such as property and civil rights (s. 92(13)) and matters of a local or private nature (s. 92(16)). A health-licensing offence is a valid provincial regulatory offence.
2A trial judge is asked to convict an accused of a 'common law offence' of public mischief that is not found in any statute. How should the judge rule under Canadian criminal law?
A.Convict, because Canadian courts retain power to create new offences as needed
B.Acquit, because s. 9 of the Criminal Code abolishes common law offences (except contempt of court)
C.Convict, because the conduct was clearly blameworthy and harmful
D.Refer the question to Parliament before deciding
Explanation: Section 9 of the Criminal Code abolishes common law offences in Canada, with the sole exception of contempt of court. The principle of legality requires that offences be created by statute and pre-exist the conduct. A judge cannot convict for an offence that has no statutory basis.
3Although s. 9 of the Criminal Code abolishes common law offences, which of the following remains expressly preserved by the Criminal Code?
A.Common law offences of seditious libel
B.Common law power of provinces to create true crimes
C.Common law defences, which are preserved by s. 8(3) of the Criminal Code
D.Common law rule allowing conviction without proof of fault
Explanation: Section 8(3) of the Criminal Code expressly preserves common law defences and justifications (such as necessity, duress at common law, officially induced error per Levis v. Tetrault, and entrapment per R. v. Mack) except insofar as they are altered by statute. While offences must be statutory, defences may still be developed by the courts.
4An accused is charged with a hybrid offence. The Crown has not yet elected how to proceed. What is the practical significance of the Crown's election between indictable and summary conviction procedure?
A.It determines whether the Charter applies to the prosecution
B.It changes the standard of proof from beyond a reasonable doubt to a balance of probabilities
C.It determines whether the accused is presumed innocent
D.It affects available penalties, limitation periods, and the mode of trial, including whether a jury trial is available
Explanation: For hybrid offences the Crown elects to proceed summarily or by indictment. The election affects the maximum penalty, procedural limitation periods, and the mode of trial. Jury trials are not available for summary conviction offences or for indictable offences within the absolute jurisdiction of a provincial court judge under s. 553.
5Parliament enacts a new offence whose wording is genuinely ambiguous, capable of two reasonable meanings. A court must choose between a broader reading that captures the accused's conduct and a narrower reading that does not. Which interpretive principle applies?
A.Where genuine ambiguity remains after purposive interpretation, the residual presumption favours the interpretation more favourable to the accused (strict construction)
B.The court must always adopt the reading most favourable to the Crown
C.The court must defer entirely to the prosecutor's interpretation
D.Penal statutes are interpreted exactly like commercial contracts, against the drafter
Explanation: Criminal provisions are interpreted purposively, but where a genuine ambiguity remains, the residual principle of strict construction of penal statutes resolves the doubt in favour of the accused (R. v. Mac). This reflects the principle of legality and the requirement of fair notice in criminal law.
6The Crown seeks to uphold an offence provision that limits a Charter right. To justify the limit under s. 1 of the Charter, what framework must the Crown satisfy?
A.Proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty
B.The Oakes test: a pressing and substantial objective, plus proportionality (rational connection, minimal impairment, and proportionate effects)
C.A showing that Parliament invoked the s. 33 notwithstanding clause
D.A demonstration that the right was waived by the accused
Explanation: Under R. v. Oakes, a Charter-infringing law can be saved by s. 1 if it pursues a pressing and substantial objective and is proportionate: rationally connected to the objective, minimally impairing of the right, and proportionate in its overall effects. The Crown bears the burden on a balance of probabilities.
7The actus reus of a criminal offence generally must be performed voluntarily. An accused strikes another person while in a state of automatism caused by a sudden, unexpected event. What is the consequence of involuntariness for the actus reus?
A.The actus reus is established but the mens rea is presumed
B.Voluntariness is irrelevant to the actus reus and concerns only sentencing
C.Where the act is involuntary, there is no actus reus, so an essential element of the offence is missing
D.Involuntariness automatically establishes the defence of necessity
Explanation: Voluntariness is a component of the actus reus: the prohibited act must be the product of the accused's conscious will. Where conduct is involuntary (as in automatism), the actus reus is not made out and an essential element of the offence is missing, supporting an acquittal (subject to the special rules for mental-disorder automatism).
8An accused is charged with possession of a controlled substance found in a shared apartment. To establish 'possession' for the purposes of the actus reus, what must the Crown prove beyond mere proximity to the item?
A.Only that the accused was physically present in the same room as the substance
B.That the accused intended to sell the substance
C.That the accused owned the apartment
D.Knowledge of the character of the item plus some measure of control over it (consistent with R. v. Terrence on constructive possession)
Explanation: Possession requires both knowledge of the character of the thing and a measure of control over it. For constructive or joint possession, R. v. Terrence requires knowledge and consent together with some measure of control; mere presence near an item or knowledge that others possess it is insufficient.
9Two men agree to a consensual fist fight. One intentionally strikes the other, causing serious bodily harm. The accused argues that consent negates the assault. How does R. v. Jobidon affect the role of consent here?
A.As a matter of common law policy, consent is vitiated where adults intentionally apply force causing serious hurt or non-trivial bodily harm in a fight
B.Consent is a complete defence to any assault, regardless of the harm caused
C.Consent is irrelevant to assault in all circumstances
D.Consent vitiates the actus reus only if it is given in writing
Explanation: In R. v. Jobidon, the Supreme Court held that the common law limits the legal effect of consent: one cannot consent to the intentional infliction of serious hurt or non-trivial bodily harm in a fist fight. Consent is thus vitiated in such cases, illustrating how the common law shapes the actus reus element of absence of consent.
10A complainant agrees to sexual activity but specifies that she does not consent to becoming unconscious during it. The accused renders her unconscious and continues. The accused argues she consented in advance. What does R. v. J.A. establish about consent during unconsciousness?
A.Advance consent to sexual activity while unconscious is valid under the Criminal Code
B.Consent must be present and operative throughout the sexual activity; the Code does not recognize consent given by an unconscious person
C.Consent once given can never be revoked
D.Unconsciousness is irrelevant to consent so long as consent was initially given
Explanation: In R. v. J.A., the Supreme Court held that consent for sexual assault purposes must be conscious, present, and ongoing throughout the activity. The definition of consent in the Criminal Code does not permit advance consent to sexual touching that occurs while the complainant is unconscious; an unconscious person cannot consent.
About the NCA Criminal Law Practice Questions
Verified exam format metadata for NCA Canadian Criminal Law Examination is pending. The practice questions above remain available while official exam length, timing, passing score, fee, and administrator details are reviewed.