Ontario Highway Traffic Act

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Also, I would like to point out that the charge was withdrawn.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 ...