Search found 68 matches

Be sure to use the French Language Services Act defence as part of your overall defence game plan.

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1183.html

I respectfully disagree.

There are three lanes going in the same direction.

Section 159.1(2) addresses drivers in the same lane as the emergency vehicle, and it addresses drivers in the lane adjacent to the emergency vehicle.

Those in the same lane are required to move to another lane, (the part I left in because bondra12 was in the same lane ...

bondra12 - you state it is a three lane street. Is the middle lane a turning lane? or three lanes going in one direction and three lanes going in the opposite direction?

You state the cop had someone pulled over in the right lane, you moved to the middle lane and didn't go into the left lane, so am I right, there are three lanes going in one ...

Include the French Language Services Act defence in your arguent when you fight the ticket in court.

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1183.html

Shelby, it's not a silly law at all. Your friend is 100% correct, so do not plead guilty, plead not guilty but make sure the sign is in fact not in French and English.

Read these two links.

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1183.html

http://www.yourbestdefence.com/illegal_ ... _case.html

Just read a case on disclosure yesterday.

Read it and all the referenced cases therein.

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2009/2009oncj307/2009oncj307.html

You can also request under the POA s. 111 (2) that the fine not be paid until the appeal is heard and decided.


POA

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90p33 ...

Breaking new ground interests me, but it's very time consuming. No lower court will support a citzen or s. 172 would already be history. Getting to the Supreme Court takes up to 7 years!!

And the lower courts know it, which is why they walk all over us.

They know next to no one will fight that long.

All the other issues I raise, s. 172, RIDE ...

In my view, the reason the cases go unreported is because itll turn the entire justice system upside down. Can you imagine how much it would cost the entire province to change every sign and street sign into a bilingual sign?

It will also require every cop to be bilingual.

The government doesn't want people to know about this law or argument, so ...

The courts in Ottawa are in Ontario. I realize they can reject the defence but the Supreme Court cannot. I doubt the court of appeal would either.

It's the law, whether they like it or not.

The cost of implementing a law is has no bearing on whether its a valid law. The government knew what it would cost when the enacted it.

If someone ...

Read my comments on the following link. They apply to you in your case.

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1183.html

It doesnt appear to me that demerit points must be posted on the certificate or summons unless the certificate and summons has a spot on it to indicate demerit points are involved.

Bear in mind that not all charges involved points.

The certificate must set out the charge under ss. 13 and/or 25 of the POA.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html ...

The French Language Service Act (FLSA) requires all services and procedures to be in both languages. It applies to ALL communications. If the part of the certificate or notice of offence that the cop fills in is not in both languages it doesn't pass the smell test.

Municipalities must pass by-laws in order for the bilingual thing to apply on ...

You're leaving Ottawa but what community were you in when you got the ticket?

Did the cop speak to you in both French and English?

You're charged under s. 128. They cannot impound your car even on conviction.

You're facing a fine of $9.75 for each kilometre per hour that you were over the speed limit, thus $507 plus some surcharges.

But, do not plead guilty.

When the cop stopped you, did he speak to you in both French and English?

Where the cop filled in the ticket parts ...

If it were me, I would advise the impound facility owner to return my property for free immediately and if he refuses to I would place him under arrest for possession of stolen property, mischief and fraud or false pretences.

If I were to sue, I would sue the Provincial Liberal Party, not the Crown in Right of Ontario. Or maybe both.

The Liberal ...

I just addressed this issue the other day.

http://www.ontariohighwaytrafficact.com/topic1177.html

The impound facility is right now in possession of stolen property. That's a crime under the Criminal Code.

They, as well as the police, know who this stolen property belongs too. They cannot force her to pay and must return it to its rightful ...

Under the HTA a vessel uses the same definition as the Criminal Code but the HTA does not suspend the Pleasure Craft Operator's Card.

I also spotted another massive oversight by the government. Seems to be a habit with them.

The police have no power under the HTA to force a vessel operator to stop.

While HTA s. 48 (2) and (3) allow the police ...

Don't buy the transcript; tell them you want to listen to the tape recorded hearing.

They let me do this in the past for free and even allowed me to tape record their copy of the hearing so I have a tape recorded copy of my own.

There is a gaping hole in the impaired vessel-ing law.

Impaired vessel-ing falls under HTA s. 48 and Criminal Code s. 253, just like a car does. The HTA uses the same vessel definition as the Code.

You can operate a vessel with a drivers licence or Pleasure Craft Operators Card. You can also have both.

If you have both, and are giving a 3 day ...

The Supreme Court of Canada cases that allegedly determine whether or not RIDE programs are legal were determined in 1985 and 1988.

http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1985/1985rcs2-2/1985rcs2-2.html

http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1988/1988rcs1-621/1988rcs1-621.html

While the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the program several justices were in ...

You raise a good point. If something is not covered by the HTA it doesn't mean that something doesn't exist. It only means its not covered by the HTA.

The HTA only states:

Drivers licence

32. (1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle on a highway unless the motor vehicle is within a class of motor vehicles in respect of which the person holds a ...

If you actually read s. 254 you can see by the construction of the provisions that s. 254 is a total stranger to HTA s. 48.

Section 254 only applies to s. 253 of the Criminal Code and the province is barred from using the breath test results to enforce its short-term suspensions.

Only s. 254(2)(b) could remotely be argued to apply to the ...

HTA s. 48 relies on s. 254 of the Criminal Code in enforce its short-term suspensions. Each section of 254 requires the peace officer to reasonable grounds to demand a breath test.

The words reasonable grounds bears a burden and standard of proof.

The Province bears the burden and the burden never shifts to the accused.

The standard of proof is ...

Impaired operation or impaired care and control are mens rea offences.

The province impaired related sections under HTA s. 48 are also mens rea. But the province improperly treats it as an absolute liabilty offence.

Mens rea offence place the burden and standard of proof on the Province.

No hearing is ever provided to the accused and the ...

Setion 48(6.1) says a second analysis must be performed with a different approved screening device, or if the police officer thinks it is preferable, with an instrument approved as suitable for the purpose of section 254 of the Criminal Code.

Instrument approved as suitable for the purpose of section 254 of the Criminal Code are only allowed to be ...

Section 48(6) says you can request a second test and s. 48(6.2) says immediately upon being requested to do so by the police officer.

Section 48(6) does allow the cop to request a second test; it only allows the driver to request it.


Opportunity for second analysis

48(6) Where an analysis of the breath of a person is made under subsection (2 ...

Reg. 473/06) is being revoked on October 3, 2009 as it was a pilot project that is now becoming law.

Section 38 of the HTA is being amended and will become law sometime after Oct 3.


38. (1) No person under the age of 16 years shall drive or operate a motor-assisted bicycle or power-assisted bicycle on a highway. 2009, c. 5, s. 8.

Same

(2) No ...

I figure if the bicycle based contraption meets none of the provincial or federal specifications it is not legal for HTA purposes.

Under the HTA a "motorcycle" means a self-propelled vehicle having a seat or saddle for the use of the driver and designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground, and includes a motor ...

Bear in mind a "power-assisted bicycle" might not be the same thing as a "motor assisted bicycle" for purposes of the HTA.

A "power-assisted bicycle" is electric and does not have a piston driven motor.

A "motor assisted bicycle" under the HTA can be electric or piston driven.


A "motor assisted bicycle" under the HTA means a bicycle,

(a) that ...

REG 473/06, as Squishy points out.

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/regs/english/elaws_regs_060473_e.htm

Definition

1. (1) In this Regulation,

"power-assisted bicycle" means a bicycle that,

(a) is a power-assisted bicycle as defined in subsection 2 (1) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations made under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Canada ...