Search found 2654 matches

Making a vehicle aerodynamic and reducing wind noise does not mean you can't hear a loud motorcycle approaching around you. If they did make a vehicle even close to sound proof from the outside environment that would be very dangerous.

I'm not referring to the aerodynamics and wind noise. Much of the extra crash protection (side impact beams ...

I might be a little too late in replying, but you can certainly try to plea-bargain to a by-law infraction. That's probably your best choice. The Prosecutor will likely offer you a deal before the trial starts.

What exactly is a "by-law"?


Laws that are set by the cities/municipalities. Things like local parking laws, noise, etc...

How can ...

Cars these days are designed to minimize the amount of noise that will enter the passenger compartment. By the time I've heard any noise, particularly if I'm on a rural highway at an intersection controlled by a stop sign, if I were some twit who weren't paying attention, it would've been too late. As for stopping a lane change if you're in their ...

Simon Borys wrote:One thing I would ask though: is your muffler really loud?

+1

That's about the only thing that I would think would draw the officer's attention. Otherwise, who cares where the exhaust exits? Doesn't seem to fit the charge...

Is there a general rule of thumb for this?


Not really, as Simon said. Depends on the insurer. For example, my provider does not give an increase for a single "minor" infraction, such as 15 km/h over the limit. A second minor infraction within a 3-year period results in a surcharge. Many others, however, will increase your rate for ANY ...

plus we jointly re-write the HTA to make sense

One can only hope...

There has to be some penalty, say $250-500 added to the fine for a "no show" at court.

No argument there. No-show penalty should cover the cost of the officer's overtime, the Prosecutor's paperwork/filing, JP's time, etc. If there are extenuating circumstances (e.g. medical ...

Thrown out entirely? Maybe. It used to be that an incorrect date would get the ticket tossed for sure, but now it's more difficult. If the date is missing, then, absolutely. There might be some others who have more recent case law and information about that.

As for plea-bargaining, since it is your first ticket, you should be able to plead it down ...

I've read that they require at least 9 weeks to provide the information from the time requested until the court date. That being said, I received my notice of trial less than that amount of time before my court date. Curious if this will affect the case in anyway, or my 'right' to even receive the information. I should also mention the court date ...

Just to add...

If it was a ticket originated from a red light camera, there will also be NO insurance increase. Same effect as a parking ticket.

Disclosure should provide some answers, as always... usually what I'd ask for are a full copy of the officer's notes, the radar/lidar manual, and any other evidence that the Prosecutor has and intends to use at trial.

and yet just more BS and needless cutting of trees to throw another paper in a file so much for environmentally friendly!
same as putting in a "photocopy of the ticket" ...the defendant was given one and the original/legal one is sitting on the desk in front of the JP...so much for environmentally friendly!


Could easily save lots of trees and ...

No doubt that some people within the Crown Prosecutor's office (and possibly the Ministry of the Attorney General) had a cow when the JP ruled in mdevo's favour and word got out. Also, I'd be willing to bet a few people who fight traffic tickets for a living may be quite interested in this particular outcome.

It could make burden of proof for the ...

OK guys. Let's drop the personal attacks and move on. A few points to make:

If he was getting paid to provide legal services you would think, as I did that he would have some legal training and not be asking questions on a forum, to which I found a little strange... (I'm surprised no one else was wondering about this??).

I read the same thread ...

You dont know why the charge was dropped, probably the officer or witness didn't come to court. I don't think he did anything, certainly he was not qualified to represent anyone at a trial.


You also do not know why the charge was dropped.

You were not present and did not review the actual disclosure, evidence and other information of the case ...

Sigh... yeah. I think Toronto City Council has to be the dumbest legislative body in the country. Despite all of them being purported TTC cheerleaders, the TTC reacted with total shock when this happened: "What? What by-law amendment? There was supposed to be a by-law amendment? Why did no one talk to us?!"

The city of Toronto contributes $3.8 ...

Quebec's traffic court system is entirely different than Ontario's. For example, in Quebec the officer does not have to show up to testify. They can take the officer's notes, prosecute and convict you on that alone... and the success rate is very, very high. There are additional administrative fees for fighting tickets in Quebec, and surcharges for ...

Without getting into too many details, it seemed to me that Biron was trying to poll the group for interest's sake rather than to seek advice... but I could be wrong.

Also, I would like to point out that the charge was withdrawn. Result at the end of the day is what his client wanted: No conviction. And, obviously if his "client" was "guilty" of ...

Looks like they drank the koolaid.

They're just as brainless as a glass of koolaid anyway... and that might be insulting the glass of koolaid.

There is no exception for TTC buses or any trucks. Indeed, the TTC buses have turbochargers that need 3 minutes to cool down. If they shut the bus off before the turbocharger cools, they'll blow the ...

hwybear is right - this is not a fatal error. The "set fine" applies if you pay out of court, and in this case, it is correct. The statutory fine (what you were quoting) could apply if you go to trial and lose, depending on the Justice of the Peace... although usually they also just give you the set fine.

Does it apply on private property like driveways?


I'd have to double-check but I think it does. :shock:

That said... only 76 tickets are issued, on average, per year for this offence, so not much enforcement going on. This was also a bit comical: Worrying about a handful of vehicles idling for over 1 minute on the side of the road, versus the ...

mathvw wrote: am glad you were there with me so you can remind me of the circomstances.

...

A bit sensitive, are we?

Stationary and moving radar, and LIDAR, all have judicial notice. Here is some case law (not binding) regarding taking judicial notice of moving radar (the Genesis Directional is a "moving" radar):

R v. Dattomo, 2009

Radar, whether it is stationary or moving, is not a novel or new technology being introduced to the courts in speeding cases ...

Here's the legal jargon from the Highway Traffic Act, specifically section 150 (2) and (3):

Driving off roadway prohibited

(2) No driver of a motor vehicle shall overtake and pass another vehicle by driving off the roadway. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 150 (2).

Non-application of subs. (2)

(3) Subsection (2) does not apply to the driver of,

a ...

Thanks for the update. And yes, that signage is rather ridiculous, not to mention pointless as it really doesn't improve traffic flow/safety.

mathvw wrote:washington law.

That's news to me... I guess Washington is one exception.

Do you need any more information from the disclosure?

If you could type out the officer's notes (removing any personal details that may identify you or the officer specifically), that would help. Speeding offences are not the easiest to beat, though. As Simon Borys said, it's an absolute liability offence. The only defence to it is defence of ...

We have a lady here whose husband has a bike, and she swears that the loud muffler saves his life.

I'm sure that's largely because he tells her that. Anyway, most fatal motorcycle collisions that are caused by car drivers are usually because the driver either pulled out in front of the MC, blew a stop sign where the MC had the right-of-way ...

I would also like to point out the obvious: This thread has endurance... So far we've covered:

- R. v. W(D)
- London v. Young
- R. v. Sandhu
- R. v. Nikolovski
- R. v. Tran
- R. v. McGibbon

:shock: :shock:

Just following up on something I hadn't yet responded to:

I must also say the many JPs, if not most of them, are educated and very well ...

but quick side tracking by the defendant (only sent one bill with paralegal for a "rad repair" worth $400) paralegal presented the one bill, before I had a chance to speak with prosecutor.


That's beyond obvious BSing by the defendant, IMO. I had relatively minor damage to my car thanks to two hit-and-runs in a parking lot. There's nothing like ...

It is, indeed, a fatal error! There are a couple of ways to proceed here. One is to simply not show up for trial. The JP must then examine the ticket, as you have "defaulted," so to speak. If there are any fatal errors, he's supposed to quash it without you present. If he doesn't quash it, you can then appeal. (Could be a bit complicated but others ...