Failing to Stop

Hello All,

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.

Thanks

If the officer believes you failed to stop, section 144(18) is correct. While subsection 19 allows you to make a right turn after stopping on a red, the actual offence of failing to stop falls under subsection 18. The only time I can think of when you'd be charged under subsection 19 is if you made a proper stop, but proceeded without yielding to through traffic.

Hello Stanton, thank you for your post however I still don't understand because I was charged for failing to stop on a red however I was making a right hand turn in such circumstances, I would think Section 144(19) would apply since this section also requires that the vehicle stop and then yield, I am being accused of failing to stop in this case. I would think that Section 144(18) would apply only in cases where you cannot proceed on a red until the driver has a green light. Granted in the cops eyes I failed to stop, however I believe section 114(18) would only apply in cases where I would be going straight through the light or turning left. Should not Section 144(19) trump 114(18) in my case and thus be the offence I am charged under since I turned right? Section 144(19) says "despite Section 144(18)....".

Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks

No, it's definitely the correct section. As you said, you were charged for failing to stop for a red light which is subsection 18. It doesn't matter if you're going left, right or straight through, it all falls under the same subsection if you don't stop. Subsection 19 is an exemption (basically saying you won't be charged) for right turns, but since the officer doesn't believe you stopped, you don't qualify for the exemption.

Thanks Stanton for your insight and quick response. The difficulty I am having is the intention of subsection (19). The word stopping does appear in subsection(19) as well, where it says, and I am paraphrasing, after stopping and yielding a driver may turn right.

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.

Thanks

Again, it's an exemption, not a separate charge.

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.

Thanks Stanton for your reply. One other question I took a look at the ticket again and it reads that the set fine is $260 but the total payable is $320, shouldn't it be $325? If so could I get the ticket quashed on the incorrect total?

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.

Thanks

Yes, the fine should read $260/$325. Your best bet may be to hope a JP notices the error and quashes the ticket. There are some threads that will walk you through the process if they don't.

Thanks, so I shouldn't mention this up frount? I was thinking of seeing the prosecutor and mentioning it to him to see if he could do something about it? Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks

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

hwybear 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

s144: http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statut ... .htm#BK222

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 – 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).

wouldn't (19) be the exception to (14) for red light right turns?

It says subject to section 14, meaning 19 grants the exemption unless 14 is in effect.

i see