I was recently stopped for going 88 km/h in a 60 km/h posted zone. The officer reduced the charge to 70 km/h in a 60 km/h zone. When I drove by that area the next day, brand new signs stating 80 km/h were posted. I can't be certain what was posted the previous night but I'm sure the officer will say he did a check and the sign listing the speed limit as 60 km/h was clearly posted. I went to my region's website and found that the local by-law was amended 7 days before. With that being said, I know a speed limit change is not in effect until a sign is posted. Long story short, when I read the supporting documentation for this speed limit amendment, it stated that the speed limit on the section I was traveling on was 'remaining' at 80 km/h. In fact, there was never a by-law changing this to a 60 km/h zone! My question is this: 1. If the sign did indeed say 60 km/h but the speed of that stretch of the road was and always should have been 80 km/h, is this grounds for either dismissal or an amendment of my charge to 88 km/h in an 80 zone? If so, can anyone point me to case law where a speeding ticket was thrown out or amended because an incorrect speed limit sign was posted?
I was recently stopped for going 88 km/h in a 60 km/h posted zone. The officer reduced the charge to 70 km/h in a 60 km/h zone.
When I drove by that area the next day, brand new signs stating 80 km/h were posted. I can't be certain what was posted the previous night but I'm sure the officer will say he did a check and the sign listing the speed limit as 60 km/h was clearly posted.
I went to my region's website and found that the local by-law was amended 7 days before. With that being said, I know a speed limit change is not in effect until a sign is posted.
Long story short, when I read the supporting documentation for this speed limit amendment, it stated that the speed limit on the section I was traveling on was 'remaining' at 80 km/h. In fact, there was never a by-law changing this to a 60 km/h zone!
My question is this:
1. If the sign did indeed say 60 km/h but the speed of that stretch of the road was and always should have been 80 km/h, is this grounds for either dismissal or an amendment of my charge to 88 km/h in an 80 zone? If so, can anyone point me to case law where a speeding ticket was thrown out or amended because an incorrect speed limit sign was posted?
From what I can determine, this would be the best to use (taken from http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlight. ... cj183.html) "Boyd-Gibbons v. Skinner, [1951] 1 All E.R. 1049 (U.K.K.B.)" - the Court set aside an acquittal at trial, holding that the presence of the speed limit signs, which must be deemed to have been lawfully erected by the local authority (being obligated to do so), was prima facie proof that a direction had been given under the highway traffic legislation, and in the absence of evidence to displace that proof, the Respondent should have been convicted. Therefore, it is assumed from the presence of a speed limit sign that there is an appropriate underlying by-law. It is not the prosecutor's responsibility to prove this, but rather my responsibility to show there is no underlying by-law. If I can show this (which I can), the speeding ticket could be either thrown out or amended to 88 km/h in an 80 km/h. For the record, if the ticket it amended and not thrown out, I will write every traffic ticket organization, every paralegal, and our local paper advising everyone that tickets given in that zone all need to be amended or thrown out! Am I correct in my legal reasoning above? Am I bring to vindictive by bringing this to everyone's attention if I win?
"Boyd-Gibbons v. Skinner, [1951] 1 All E.R. 1049 (U.K.K.B.)"
- the Court set aside an acquittal at trial, holding that the presence of the speed limit signs, which must be deemed to have been lawfully erected by the local authority (being obligated to do so), was prima facie proof that a direction had been given under the highway traffic legislation, and in the absence of evidence to displace that proof, the Respondent should have been convicted.
Therefore, it is assumed from the presence of a speed limit sign that there is an appropriate underlying by-law. It is not the prosecutor's responsibility to prove this, but rather my responsibility to show there is no underlying by-law. If I can show this (which I can), the speeding ticket could be either thrown out or amended to 88 km/h in an 80 km/h.
For the record, if the ticket it amended and not thrown out, I will write every traffic ticket organization, every paralegal, and our local paper advising everyone that tickets given in that zone all need to be amended or thrown out!
Am I correct in my legal reasoning above? Am I bring to vindictive by bringing this to everyone's attention if I win?
#1 why do you think that a speed limit is not in effect unless there's a sign for it? That's just incorrect. #2 I'm not sure how much traction you'd have with a 60 year old case from the UK. If the JP didn't agree with the reasoning, they'd just say they weren't bound by it, which they're not. #3 If the actual posted signage was wrong at the time you committed the offence, you'd probably have a great argument for the defence of officially induced error #4 If the road you were traveling on was actually an 80 and you can prove that, then that's the speed limit for the purpose of the charge you're facing at trial
#1 why do you think that a speed limit is not in effect unless there's a sign for it? That's just incorrect.
#2 I'm not sure how much traction you'd have with a 60 year old case from the UK. If the JP didn't agree with the reasoning, they'd just say they weren't bound by it, which they're not.
#3 If the actual posted signage was wrong at the time you committed the offence, you'd probably have a great argument for the defence of officially induced error
#4 If the road you were traveling on was actually an 80 and you can prove that, then that's the speed limit for the purpose of the charge you're facing at trial
That's what's listed in the Highway Traffic Act, Section 128: No by-law passed under this section or regulation made under clause (7) (c) becomes effective until the highway or portion of it affected by the by-law or regulation, as the case may be, is signed in accordance with this Act and the regulations. Without a sign, would the posted limit be the default for that region (i.e. 80 km/h in rural, and 50 km/h in urban)? I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for poiting that out. That's what I figured. Do you know of any case law or government law that supports this, or do you feel this is just obvious? Am I correct then in this statement: If the speed limit on a road is 60 km/h, a by-law changing it to 80 km/h is only effective once it's signing is changed from 80 km/h to 60 km/h? Once signed as 80 km/h, any deviation from this must be accompanied by either: i - a change in the underlying by-law, or ii - the speed limit changed according to Highway Traffic Act 128(8), which would also require signed designation that this road was a construction zone? In other words, if a by-law was passed on March 1st and signed on March 8th, the speed limit changes on March 8th - correct? Thanks for the response.
Simon Borys wrote:
#1 why do you think that a speed limit is not in effect unless there's a sign for it? That's just incorrect.
That's what's listed in the Highway Traffic Act, Section 128:
No by-law passed under this section or regulation made under clause (7) (c) becomes effective until the highway or portion of it affected by the by-law or regulation, as the case may be, is signed in accordance with this Act and the regulations.
Without a sign, would the posted limit be the default for that region (i.e. 80 km/h in rural, and 50 km/h in urban)?
Simon Borys wrote:
#2 I'm not sure how much traction you'd have with a 60 year old case from the UK. If the JP didn't agree with the reasoning, they'd just say they weren't bound by it, which they're not.
I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for poiting that out.
Simon Borys wrote:
#3 If the actual posted signage was wrong at the time you committed the offence, you'd probably have a great argument for the defence of officially induced error
That's what I figured. Do you know of any case law or government law that supports this, or do you feel this is just obvious?
Simon Borys wrote:
#4 If the road you were traveling on was actually an 80 and you can prove that, then that's the speed limit for the purpose of the charge you're facing at trial.
Am I correct then in this statement: If the speed limit on a road is 60 km/h, a by-law changing it to 80 km/h is only effective once it's signing is changed from 80 km/h to 60 km/h? Once signed as 80 km/h, any deviation from this must be accompanied by either:
i - a change in the underlying by-law, or
ii - the speed limit changed according to Highway Traffic Act 128(8), which would also require signed designation that this road was a construction zone?
In other words, if a by-law was passed on March 1st and signed on March 8th, the speed limit changes on March 8th - correct?
Re #1: you are correct, without signage it defaults to 50/80 Re #3: I don't know if there is any case law on officially induced error with respect to speed signage, there's just the generic case law which sets out the defence, which you would then argue applies to this situation. This is not a simple matter to argue and I would suggest you contact and consult with a lawyer or paralegal on it.
Re #1: you are correct, without signage it defaults to 50/80
Re #3: I don't know if there is any case law on officially induced error with respect to speed signage, there's just the generic case law which sets out the defence, which you would then argue applies to this situation. This is not a simple matter to argue and I would suggest you contact and consult with a lawyer or paralegal on it.
I followed the procedures mentioned in the previous threads regarding the disclosure and received it today. My court date is November 5 2009 in Whitby. After going through the notes I realized 2 things:
1- the notes are horribly illegible and difficult to read
2- I have notes from two different officers.
Now I am not sure if this means that both the officers will be at court for the hearing or…
I hope I can paint the picture with the accuracy that the truth deserves. I have no intention of just beating a ticket.. but more like beating a really unfair ticket. You decide!
I had entered Canada after a short trip downsouth through Detroit on my way to Toronto. Not being equipped with a GPS unit I had to rely on the printable poorman's version from Mapquest. I followed Huron Church Rd.,…
Need an expert advice here. 10 days ago I got a speeding ticket. Ticket has a fatal error on its face-offense not known to law. It says speeding 75km/hr in posted 60km/hr zone. What is the best way to proceed?
1. Should I completely ignore this ticket and let the JP to quash it?
2. Should I go with option 3 - request a trial and force the fatal error by not showing up at court?
My name is Brian. I am in my late 20s and live in Toronto. I do not own a car but half a dozen times a year I rent one with my Visa. (To get out of the city and go to a beach or ski for example.)
I have never drunk and drive but I face a problem and Im wondering if anyone can tell me what to do. Several months ago I was at a weekend party and had quit a bit to consume. When I stopped…
I was travelling east bound on ellesmere road and approached markham road attempting to make a right turn. All signal lights were red and cars traveling down markham road south were given the green arrow. I slowed down and attempted to make the right turn. I got ticketed by a cop who was parked in a gas station facing the intersection in a (no parking zone). I…
Crested a hill, officer coming at me, pulled a u turn and pulled me over.
I will go back and look again but I thought I was in an 80 not a 70 and I am positive I wasn't doing more than 120. My speedo read 110-115. I have aftermarket tires and rims so I assume this would be the difference.
It was around 7pm, already dark, nobody on the road but myself,…
I am looking for the case law that is commonly used when the prosecution says they only need to disclose the testing pages of a radar manual or laser manual.
I am only interested in the binding decisions (appeals court or higher?), and not in the non-binding Justice of the Peace decisions.
I was pulled over two nights ago and charged with failing to stop a stop sign. On the ticket, it says 'disobey stop sign - foil to stop' and does not say 'fail' -- something I think may be a fatal flaw? I have been driving for 12 years with no tickets, yet I live in Brampton where insurance prices are high so I do not want to be convicted as my insurance rates will spike significantly and…
A friend of mine (who is from China and with no knowledge of English at all) asked me to interpret for him on court.
He got pulled over by a stealth patrol car last october, got 3 tickets (fail to show insurance card, using cell phones and fail to stop on right for emergency vehicle) , court date is next week. He told me his insurance expired for less than a month and other charges are false…
I understand the severity of my offences, and I can't stress how much I regret it. I know I endangered the lives of myself and more importantly others. I usually do not speed and I know running late for work is an unacceptable excuse. I will be a man and accept the consequences of my actions although I would appreciate any advice for my situation.
Guys back in january i got a speeding ticket on dvp, but i am 90% sure he did not caught me on radar, i asked for disclosure request and i just received today, I have asked for: a full copy of the police officers notes, a copy of both sides of the officers copy of the ticket, witness will say statements, speed gun manual, calibration record, repair history and officer's training certificate but…
I need some help here. So today I was on my way to get my tires changed from my winter tires to my regular summer staggered set of tires. I was driving in mississauga on my way to my destination, I got pulled over by an officer where I was given a ticket for having improper mudguards. For some context, I drive a stock 2013 C63 AMG with winter tires at the time. I was never…
I'd like to start this off by saying for the last two weeks I have been browsing the forums. I'm trying to prepare myself for an early resolution meeting with a prosecutor (in Brampton, if that matters). I have a clean record and as a teacher, I always do my best to follow rules (trying to practice what I preach!)
On December 4, 2014 I was preparing to turn right at a very busy intersection.…
I have question, today I was going to work in my normal route there is a triangle intersection with my side being the only one with a stop sign.
There's a car in front me who stopped at the stop sign, and the third-side there's a incoming car with their hazard-light flashing but they don't have stop sign, yet coming in at a slow speed.
Right after the car in front me went through the stop sign,…
On my way to work this morning I received a ticket for disobey sign. I was on Hwy 10 Mississauga in the right lane. The right lane leads to the 401 and there is a sign saying Right Lane Exits. I Tried to merge left before the on ramp as did 3 other people. We all got a ticket for doing that. Is there anything I can do? I did not realize I was breaking any law it was a dotted line where I tried to…
This is my first post, before I jump right in I would like to thank the forum, members, posters and moderators for all the information posted. I feel like I have been able to learn a lot from others experiences, so thank you all.
This will be a lengthy post. But if you are dealing with a Disobey Sign HTA 182(2) - No Straight Through Intersection you may find this extremely…
Let me start this with saying that this isn't in regards to a ticket, more a discussion surrounding front license plates and learning about the rules behind them. (Most of the quote stuff is using colloquial terms, mostly because I couldn't really find a better way to describe it; it's not meant to be offensive.)
I know Ontario law/HTA mandates having a front license plate unlike some States in…
Hi Guys! I've just had my trial day yesterday. I was not at fault but was convicted anyways.
It is such a travesty! There is no justice at the traffic court. It is just a no mercy machine to part someone with his money, no common sense applies and no reasonable argument being considered. Such a shame! The justice, the policeman and the prosecutor ganged up against me. The justice kept interrupting…
Well first of all ... glad to have found the forum - hoping to find answers to 'alot' of questions
I was unfortunate in July 2010 in that I ended up rolling my 2009 Ranger three times, through a fence and landing on the roof on a rained-out road that was/is in need of proper repair in Eastern Ontario.
I was assisted out of the vehicle by the driver who was behind me.
I was traveling down the 401, noticed a speed trap, and started flashing my lights -- in order to warn oncoming drivers.
Within a 30 seconds, a car slowed, crossed the grass, and approached me from behind. Lights appeared, and I then realised that this was an officer in an undercover car.
The officer pulled me over, and while he was polite, clearly his motivation was to…
Does anyone know the specific law, statute, Charter right to refer to when a prosecutor or justice attempts to change the charge on a ticket after a trial has begun? I assume I'd object immediately (without interrupting anyone, of course) but what would be the specific legal basis of my objection?
I was right behind a school bus that looked like it was pulling over to the side in order to turn down a side street, I saw no lights so decided to go around (wide street). Was still moving as I was passing, then as I did pass I heard horn and looked back and in fact it was pulling over to p/u school kids (was a block away from my son's school, so just assumed it wouldn't be picking up kids...it…
