Here's something I always wondered about: I know a commercial truck in most instances is one above 4500 kg but that does not necessarily mean it's a heavy because you can drive any truck up to 11000 kg with a G license. The question is how is a HEAVY truck defined in relation to a posted NO HEAVY TRUCKS sign on certain streets? Does it only refer to trucks with a Gross registered or actual weight of over 11,000 kg that would require a D license? Or is it subjective? On streets with a NO TRUCKS sign are there statutory exemptions other than for emergency vehicles or is this a matter or reasonable discretion?
Here's something I always wondered about:
I know a commercial truck in most instances is one above 4500 kg but that does not necessarily mean it's a heavy because you can drive any truck up to 11000 kg with a G license.
The question is how is a HEAVY truck defined in relation to a posted NO HEAVY TRUCKS sign on certain streets? Does it only refer to trucks with a Gross registered or actual weight of over 11,000 kg that would require a D license? Or is it subjective?
On streets with a NO TRUCKS sign are there statutory exemptions other than for emergency vehicles or is this a matter or reasonable discretion?
I'm also interested in this, because I've seen what appears to be heavy trucks even dump trucks do U-Turns when they approach 'No Trucks Sign'. I've also seen them pull over with their hazard lights and simulate fake breakdowns as soon as they see police officers. But I've never seen our local police stop these trucks for disobeying the sign.
I'm also interested in this, because I've seen what appears to be heavy trucks even dump trucks do U-Turns when they approach 'No Trucks Sign'. I've also seen them pull over with their hazard lights and simulate fake breakdowns as soon as they see police officers. But I've never seen our local police stop these trucks for disobeying the sign.
The bottom line is that there is no definition of "heavy truck" in the HTA. It all depends on what the JP chooses to accept as meeting the definition. On appeal, the court accepted this position in the Boyd decision.. While in that case there WAS a by-law in existence that defined 'heavy truck', I believe the court's justification was wrong. Where there is no by-law in existence, then there is no definition of the term that applies. Accordingly, a prima facie case simply can't be made out and must fail! Besides, if trial courts can simply draw upon their common sense to 'read' in a definition then it creates ambiguity at law since you could have different definitions applying! Any doubt or ambiguity should always go in the favour of the defendant as per the rules of statutory interpretation. The legislature should simply have defined the term. That's why I suspect the Court of Appeal would likely reverse the Boyd decision if it was appealed further.
The bottom line is that there is no definition of "heavy truck" in the HTA. It all depends on what the JP chooses to accept as meeting the definition. On appeal, the court accepted this position in the Boyd decision..
While in that case there WAS a by-law in existence that defined 'heavy truck', I believe the court's justification was wrong. Where there is no by-law in existence, then there is no definition of the term that applies. Accordingly, a prima facie case simply can't be made out and must fail! Besides, if trial courts can simply draw upon their common sense to 'read'
in a definition then it creates ambiguity at law since you could have different definitions applying! Any doubt or ambiguity should always go in the favour of the defendant as per the rules of statutory interpretation. The legislature should simply have defined the term. That's why I suspect the Court of Appeal would likely reverse the Boyd decision if it was appealed further.
Super interesting (for me anyway) it's not too often you see a major hole in the law like this. So in theory anyone facing this charge should be able to successfully appeal if convicted even if they were driving a truck that requires a heavy truck license.
Super interesting (for me anyway) it's not too often you see a major hole in the law like this. So in theory anyone facing this charge should be able to successfully appeal if convicted even if they were driving a truck that requires a heavy truck license.
Hi everyone. I'm asking for a friend who has a question of interpretation.
He was ticketed for using a hand-held device. He contends that he was acting within the exemption provided under Subsection 14 (1) of O. Reg. 366/09, which reads as follows (emphasis added):
Hey guys i just wanted to know what speeds you see others do on the roads on a regular basis. As we all know no body drives 100 km. It seems they only hit that speed twice once on the way up and once on the way down.
it seems the De Facto limit on the 401 is about 120-130. But lately i dont know if…
On June 10, 2017, I was pulled over by an OPP on the 403 heading WB and told I registered 136km/hr. I kept chit chat to a minimum and took my ticket and went on with my day. I later requested my disclosure and did not receive it until a week before my Oct. 27 court date, and so I had my date…
Anyone know any more information? Apparently kathleen wynne mentioned trying to introduce legislation after more than 20 years of no speed cameras. My guess is that it wont happen, since they've tried before many times to bring it back after it was abolished.
The other day I was given a ticket for speeding 119 in a 90, on highway 17 near Marathon, ON (Speeding ticket capital of the universe, BTW). The officer claims to have "clocked" me using the vehicle mounted radar at 121 KMH and dropped it (presumably to lower fine and demerits).
I posted this in the 3 Demerit Section and haven't received any
responses.
I received a failure to stop at an amber light ticket on April 17, 2009. At my First Attendance Meeting I asked to read the police officer's notes and remember thinking how ridiculous they were and the difficulty…
I was on the right side of the road going straight when a pedestrian waved down the taxi driver in the lane next to me. He pulled over to the right without any notice or signalling and hit me with the side of his car.
There were many witnesses but I immediately had a concussion and did not think of…
My mother was driving EB on a 4 lane street (2 lanes EB, 2 lanes WB).
She was in the left hand lane and started a left hand turn so as to enter a side street, crossing WB traffic. There was NO intersection. She hit a cyclist who was heading WB. Police where called but none showed up. My…
If the speed limit is 50, and you do 100+, not only do you get 6 points. Your car gets impounded for a week, and your license suspended for 7 days, along with a hefty fine of at least $2000. The penalty is actually the same as for racing. The law came in effect on October 1, 2007. Remember -…
I was driving westbound on Hwy. 8 earlier this month in North Dumfries Township, approaching the Cambridge city limits. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. I noticed a vehicle on the shoulder on my side of the road, pointing towards me. This didn't concern me right away, as it is a rural…
