I was in Toronto yesterday and pulled over for failing to stop at a red light contrary to Section 144(18) of the HTA. I was turning right at the intersection at the time. The officer was sitting in his car about 60 feet away at a gas station looking like he was about to leave when he supposedly saw me failing to stop at a red light. His car would have been roughly parallel to mine. I was charged under Section 144(18) however should I not have been charged under Section 144(19) of the act for failing to stop on a red right before turning right?
When I read Section 114(18) it says that every driver is to stop where the traffic signal is red and not proceed until green, however I am allowed to proceed under Section 114(19) where I have stopped. I believe I should have been charged under Section 114(19) for failing to stop when turning right.
All the other information on the ticket looks correct however I plan to fight the ticket as the officer was several feet away from the intersection was looking to leave the gas station at the time I turned. It was raining at the time and I believe the officers vision of the intersection was not clear to notice that I did stop at the intersection.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Please let me know your thoughts.
I do not disagree that the issue is stopping and subsection (18) does cover this issue, however subsection (18) also goes no to say that not only is every driver to stop at a red light but they cannot go until a green. The applicable section I feel that should be applied is subsection (19) in my case as I only went through the red light because I was turning right. The issue of stopping is also dealt with in this subsection and is one of the requirements prior to proceeding through the intersection. As such, I could have been, and in my opinion should have been, charged under this subsection (19) as it is most applicable to my case.
Out of curiosity is it possible to search case law around whether anyone has ever been charged under subsection (19) for failing to stop. If so, I am thinking if this may help to illustrate the inconsistency in the application of this subsection and its intention.
Let me know your thoughts.
Here's a recent decision in regards to 144(18) where they cite 144(19). You'll note the driver was charged under 144(18) for making a right on a red and found guilty.
http://canlii.ca/en/on/oncj/doc/2011/20 ... cj215.html
You can try and research additional case law that supports your belief, but I don't think you'll find any. CanLII (the site I linked to) is an excellent place to start.
On a side note I went by the corner again this morning where the cop stopped me and there are large trees and bushes which could obstruct the view. Also, given it was raining and I am sure his line of sight to the white line of the intersection is not in view and he could not have clearly seen that I stopped.
Looking forward to your response.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca
s144: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#BK222hwybear wrote:If that same stop light you were facing also has a green arrow for a left turning lane, you can not make a right hand turn on a red. just an fyi
wouldn't (19) be the exception to (14) for red light right turns?Green arrow
(14) Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing one or more green arrow indications only or in combination with a circular red or circular amber indication and facing the indication may proceed only to follow the direction shown by the arrow. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (14).
Exception ÃƒÂ¢Ã‚â‚¬Ã‚â€œ turn
(19) Despite subsection (18) and subject to subsection (14), a driver, after stopping his or her vehicle and yielding the right of way to traffic lawfully approaching so closely that to proceed would constitute an immediate hazard, may,
(a) turn to the right; or
(b) turn to the left from a one-way street into a one-way street,
without a green indication being shown. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (19).