Stop sign - failing to stop section 136

Hi Everyone,

I need some help.

I went to court today in vaughan. The case was pushed off till may 1 2014 as they did not have time to hear my case.

There is video evidence of me going thru the stop sign.

I was wondering if anyone has any experience with filing a motion of non suit if the prosecutors office does not file the by law from the city that establishes the stop sign.??

under section 137 of the HTA is lists the citys must have by laws.

Your thoughts and experience will help!

Thanks

joe

Section 137 of the HTA says:

Stop signs, erection at intersections

137. In addition to stop signs required at intersections on through highways,

(a) the council of a municipality may by by-law provide for the erection of stop signs at intersections on highways under its jurisdiction; and

(b) the Minister may by regulation designate intersections on the Kings Highway at which stop signs shall be erected,

and every sign so erected shall comply with the regulations of the Ministry. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 137; 2002, c. 17, Sched. F, Table.

It doesn't say "must" it says "may" have bylaws.

As far as the bylaws being filed with the court, this is usually done right after they are passed.

so in your opinion if i were to go to court go thru a trial. wait for the proscutor to rest.

and then bring a motion of non suit for for the prosecutors not being able to prove its case as the bylaw was not giving to me part of my disclousure?

would this have any weight? or would i be laughed at?

How long ago did you get your ticket? If your court date is set more then 12 months after you received the ticket you might be able to make a charter challenge under section 11b for unreasonable delay. That is assuming you didn't do anything to contribute to the delay.

the ticket was on mar 27 2014.

the court was today nov 13th. 2014

it was adjourned as the proscouter said they did not have enough time as it was lunch hour. it was adjourned till may 1st. 2015