Ontario Highway Traffic Act

Bear in mind that they to sustain those charges, they have to prove that a collision occurred (maybe not for the careless). You might want to obtain disclosure and see how they're going to do that. If it is just the word of the other driver vs. your word, with no damage to his vehicle, there might be something there to argue about.

Signs: O/Reg. 615

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/regu/r ... g-615.html

The officer's evidence, like any witnesses, will be evaluated based on its own merits. Keep in mind that if the crown is going to proceed to a trial on careless, they have to prove that your driving constituted "without due care and attention or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the highway", which is not the easiest thing to ...

I'm just going to point out that you can't charge against the driver based on a school bus operator's report unless the operator knows who the driver is.

The fine for careless driving is now $490. $325 is the old fine.

The case R. v. Monahan et al., 2009 ONCJ 298 (CanLII), which can be found here: http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2009/2009oncj298/2009oncj298.html states that an incorrect set fine means that the certificate is not complete and regular on its face and thus is subject to being ...

The bus driver can complain to the police and provide the licence plate of your vehicle. In that case, the police can charge the owner of the vehicle, using the bus driver as a witness to provide evidence of the offence in court (if there is a trial). At that point it becomes the bus driver's word vs. the word of the person who defends themselves ...

With regards to question #2: The court would probably consider the error you described to be minor, that is to say not negatively impacting your ability to make a full defence to the charge, and so would not be likely to quash the charges for those errors. The prosecutor could amend if necessary

The court would probably consider the errors you described about the name and address number to be minor, that is to say not negatively impacting your ability to make a full defence to the charge, and so would not be likely to quash the charges for those errors. The prosecutor could amend if necessary

With respect to notice, the prosecutor does ...

It's not that there is a specific prohibition against this, but officers don't do it as a matter of common sense if they can't prove the speed alleged. I don't think you have any recourse to get it quashed at first glance, but if you have a trial they will be required to prove that you were going 135 km/hr. If the officer's evidence is that you ...

An officer would measure and prove speed for a bicycle the same as for a motor vehicle - radar, laser, or pacing.

As to whether the definition of bicycle applies to a unicycle, you'd have to look at the definition in the bylaw which creates this offence.

Careless may be overkill, but it depends on the circumstances surrounding the incident. That being said, often careless driving tickets are reduced to something less in the case of single vehicle accidents (like fail to drive in marked lane, or something like that). In my opinion, the damage to property shouldn't have too much of an impact on the ...

Issue addressed extensively here.

http://simonborys.wordpress.com/2010/04 ... the-radar/

I know if I ask this to 3 different cops I'll get 3 different answers.

Of course. The reason being that the legislation is not clear. The 2 relevant sections of the HTA are 175 (11) and 175 (12).

(11) Every driver or street car operator, when meeting on a highway, other than a highway with a median strip, a stopped school bus that has its ...

Is there any law that dictates coming to an abrupt stop for small animals is legal/illegal depending upon the context of the situation?
No, the onus is on the driver of the following vehicle to maintain a safe distance, sufficient to allow them to respond even to an abrupt or unanticipated action.

Also, with the other driver knowing that I was ...

That should result in the ticket being quashed.

Your choices to deal with it are to speak to the prosecutor about it, take it to trial, or allow the prosecutor to try to enter a 9.1 conviction in your absence by failing to respond and hope the JP catches the error and quashes it. If they don't you'd have to appeal.

The 1st 2 choices are easier ...