Hi all, first time here, any help would be appreciated. Several days ago I was traveling southbound on Allen road and when I reached Eglinton Ave. I stopped at the crosswalk, I waited for two pedestrians to cross and three busses pulling out of the subway station going westbound. I then checked to make sure there were no other pedestrians crossing and no further oncoming traffic and I proceeded to make a right hand turn. On the south side of Eglinton directly across from the Allen exit is a police station where I noticed a police cruiser waiting to drive out of the parking lot onto Eglinton. After making my right turn I reached a red light at Marlee Ave. and found myself right in front of the police cruiser that had just pulled out. As soon as the light turned green and I proceeded to cross Marlee the officer put on his lights and horn and pulled me over. He advised me I had made an improper turn and asked me if I did not see the sign and also how long have I been coming down this way. The next day I drove down the same route to check all the signs and did not see any signs stating no right turn on a red light. The only sign was right at the crosswalk stating "Stop Here on Red Signal". The offense on the ticket states Red light - Proceed before green, contrary to the HTA 144(18), Set fine $150.00, total $180.00. I then went into the police station and asked the officer at the front desk if it is illegal to make a right turn on a red light at which he replied no, as long as you make a full stop. I then asked if it was illegal at that particular intersection stressing that there is no sign clearly prohibiting a right turn on red and again he replied no. When I told him I received a ticket for that the day before, he said "Well that would be worth going to court for". I would be very interested in any comments and to know if anyone else has had this experience, Thank you.

A Friend of mine got a similar ticket many years back, i did not know what he did about it.
I wonder if the bilingal defence would work. Wait to hear from ticketcombat response.

Hey thanks for the advice, too bad you don't know what happened with your friends ticket. The bilingal defence may or may not work, the only problem is the sign I am charged with disobeying is not there at all, you know the sign with the traffic lights and above the lights there is an arrow turning right with a red circle around it with a line going through it, it just isn't there, in any language. Thanks for the response.

If I recall correctly, the sign isn't above the light, it's on the right side of the road as you approach the traffic light at Eglinton. You're right in that bilingual defence won't work in this case. Would be worth driving by, however, and seeing if the sign is posted on the right side of the road, adjacent to the right lane. If there's nothing there, a simple photograph with a time-date stamp on it should be sufficient to get it tossed... but take the photograph ASAP!

Even if the sign is there, there is some good news. Key thing will be to set up the court date and file a disclosure request, getting the officer's notes and an explanation and clarification of the charge. Ask, succintly, for "all relevant evidence" and an "explanation and clarification of the charge." Don't go beyond that! You did stop and comply with 144 - 18. If the sign is there, what you did, apparently, was disobey a sign. Your questioning of the officer would be something like this:

You: Was I facing a circular red light?
You: Did I proceed THROUGH a circular red light?
Read sections 144 - 18 and 144 (19) of the HTA to him and ask if you have read that correctly. Don't take the stand in your own defence. Simply state to the JP that the Crown has failed to prove the elements of the charge as issued, and they appear to be describing the elements of a different charge entirely. As such, you came prepared to defend only against 144 - 18 and as they have not proven it, you respectfully ask for it to be dismissed. The Crown may attempt to withdraw the charge and issue a new one. Object, state that the incorrect charge was not a minor error, and if the Crown is not prepared to proceed with the charge as stated, you ask that it be dismissed. That should do it.

The officer may not show up. It's about 50-50 in Toronto these days. Before it gets there, I'm fairly sure that the "no turn on red" sign requires a by-law to be erected. If the Crown does not provide a certified copy of the by-law to you in the disclosure package, file a motion in advance of the trial for a stay based on improper disclosure. Just make sure that you don't point out to the Crown that the officer appears to have charged you under the wrong part of the HTA, at least until the trial starts.

Some of the other regulars here will probably have some additional info, or correct any errors I've made. Good luck with it.

Clever!

_________________

Just a side note related but not to this particular situation.

If stopped at a red light, and then a green arrow appears to turn left....no motor vehicle can make a turn to the right while the red is showing.
Just and FYI

_________________
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca

The sign is there and it's on the post and on right side of the road.
I think it's black english letter on white background, that's why i was thinkink of bilingual defence.

I don't think I would interpret it that way. Did you experience a ruling recently??

_________________
Fight Your Ticket!

Are you absolutely sure there's a sign? I don't remember the right turn prohibition. I do remember joining a very long left turn line and debating turning right and doing a u-turn at that intersection. Which means the right turn lane was turning on red while the left turn lane had to wait out the light.

_________________
Fight Your Ticket!

I've never used it, do not have traffic lights......I remember it as an OPC trick question some 12yrs ago.

_________________
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca

That's how I have interpreted it as well. It says "subject to subsection (14)", not "despite", so that subsection is still in effect, while subsection (18) does not apply to the situation described in subsection (19).

_________________
         

Absolutely sure, no. But i thought that the existing of the sign has been confirmed by the OP.
On another note, there is a small island deviding the right turn lane and the left turn lane so pedestrians when crossing Allen Rd. will have to pass by that island, which OP called it a crosswalk.

Section 18 is stop at a red light. S. 19 says despite s.18 you can still proceed to turn right (or left on one-ways) subject to yielding right of way, proceeding with caution, yada yada yada.

S. 14 says you don't have to stop if you are going in the direction of the green arrow. If you couldn't do anything else, why would they mention s. 14 under s.19 which is the exemptions? If they had no reference to s. 14 then no you wouldn't be able to make a right on a red unless there was a green arrow pointing right.

But they DID mention s. 14 under s. 19. I take "subject to" to mean you have to stop at a red, you don't have to stop if you're going the direction of the green arrow, and you can turn right after stopping (or left one-way to one-way) subject to yielding right of way, proceeding with caution, yada yada yada. Otherwise there is no need to mention s.14 under s. 19.

_________________
Fight Your Ticket!

First of all, thanks to everyone who has contributed replys for this post and keep your input coming, the more help I can get the better chance I have of beating this ticket. Let me just clear up a couple of things for those of you not familiar with this intersection. First, as you are driving southbound on Allen Rd., as you approach Eglinton Ave., you come to an island where the left lane stops straight ahead and the right lane sort of curves a bit to the right. For those making a left turn there is no flashing green or green arrow because Allen Rd. ends at Eglinton. If you were to go straight you would end up in the parking lot of the police station, by the way, there is a sign that states you are not allowed to go straight through that intersection. Next, there is a crosswalk at the intersection and right at the crosswalk is a white sign that states in black letters "Stop Here On Red Signal" with an arrow pointing slightly downwards to the begining of the crosswalk. Now, if you were travelling westbound on Eglinton and wanted to turn right onto Allen Rd. it's basically the opposite of what I just described, with two key differences. First, the island is made up of yellow plastic posts I believe and the major difference is that there is a white sign next to the traffic light with a picture of a traffic signal with a right turn arrow and a red circle around the arrow with a red line going through it. As well there is the same "Stop Here On Red Signal" sign. I guess my question is, if it is understood that you cannot make a right turn on red, both coming off the Allen and going onto the Allen, then why is it necessary to have the no right turn sign on one, going onto Allen Rd., and not the other, coming off Allen Rd.? Please keep your imput coming.

No, subsection (14) says that you may proceed only in the direction of the green arrow, regardless of there being a red light. The red light is only mentioned to cover all signal combinations.

Zyrynx - so the intersection is set up that you may not turn right on a red from Eglinton to the Allen Road on-ramp, but there is no such indication for turning right from the Allen Road off-ramp onto Eglinton? Back when I worked for TTC, we used to take Allen Road down to Eglinton when driving between our main administration yard and our main engineering yard. I'm pretty sure we have turned right on a red many, many times, although I can't guarantee my co-workers were perfectly law-abiding citizens.

_________________