McLachlin C.J.
The Chief Justice — We are all of the opinion that the appeal should be dismissed. The way the trial judge worded his reason for concluding that the appellant’s statement was inadmissible shows that he confused the evidentiary rule relating to the admissibility of free and voluntary statements with the test for exclusion under s. 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms . In so doing, he made an error in law that justifies the intervention of the Court of Appeal. The judgment of the Court of Appeal ordering a new trial is upheld.