Search found 2111 matches

I can't see you winning an argument that there should be a grace period to ensure it's fastened. I'd imagine the Courts would expect you to exercise such diligence prior to operating your car.

R. v. Wilson, 2014 ONCA 212 (https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2014/2014onca212/2014onca212.html) is a good read on seatbelts and due diligence.

Some ...

I've never really heard an explanation as to why there is a discrepancy, but police go by the set fine schedule when issuing tickets. If you're convicted at trial, they could then chose to go by the Court set fines.

Radar would require line of sight to obtain a reading, but as you said it was an approximation of distance on his part. Being off by a significant distance could be problematic, but not fatal to the case.

The following case has been getting a bit of attention in the media lately, thought it was worth sharing.

City of Brampton v Robinson 2017 ONCJ

Short version is that a motorist made a three point turn where u-turns are prohibited (he pulled into a driveway, backed out then went the opposite direction). At trial he argued that he never made a u ...

No, it would not be legal to proceed. If there's a pedestrian crossing present, I would suggest simply dismounting and activating the crossing button. Another legal option would be to make a right turn at the light, proceed a safe distance, then make a u-turn and another right turn back at the intersection.

Thanks - that helps. Why don't they also take the speed at the time of the second photo?
Basically because they rely on sensors in the roadway before the stop line. These sensors can only measure a vehicle passing directly over. Also, the speed a vehicle is travelling after the fact is technically irrelevant to the offence, because you either ...

I just posted the following in another thread on red light cameras. Should clarify your concerns on the speed reading:

Red light cameras only measure your speed when you first reach the stop line. Somewhat confusingly, the speed shown in the second photograph is just a repeat of the data from the first photo. It is NOT your actual speed at the ...

Red light cameras only measure your speed when you first reach the stop line. Somewhat confusingly, the speed shown in the second photograph is just a repeat of the data from the first photo. It is NOT your actual speed at the time the second photo was taken. Probably make more sense to people if they simply left it blank.

From the Red Light ...

I find it interesting that the Crown actually stayed the proceedings. The matter never went to trial. I'm curious if there was another issue outside of the language issue. I can't see the Crown wanting this to become the norm.

Yes, on private property, you would be allowed to stop traffic. I would obviously take every precaution when doing so, i.e. reflective vest, hand held stop sign, etc.

I think it's important that the City of Kitchener paint lines and put up two way traffic signs on every court in the City.
As Decatur said, if the roadway didn't allow for two way traffic, nobody would ever be able to leave the Court. Signage is required for one way roads, not vice versa.

And you're probably correct that the enforcement was ...

screeech wrote:Officer was probably thinking of rules of evidence and seizing it to be able to produce it later in court if needed...again, the officer should have copied it and left the original with the driver...

Original copy would certainly be best evidence in Court. Also, photocopying a logbook isn't really an option at the side of the road.

Realistically there is no chance of a speeding charge being laid based on a dashcam video alone. The big issue would be accurately determining the speed of the subject vehicle, which really isn't possible from a front facing camera. While there have certainly people who've been charged in the past after uploading videos of their own stupid driving ...

The only electronic liability cards that are approved for use is the liability cards that Uber drivers use to show that they are insured under Uber's policy with Intact insurance. This was approved by The Superintendent of Insurance July of last year. Uber drivers still have their paper liability card from their primary insurer, however they are ...

Remember though they can only let you plea to a similar, related offence (you still have to be guilty of the lesser offence that you plea to). I'm not sure what lesser applicable offences there would in your case. Maybe someone else on the forum has some experience regarding your offence.

Highwaystar explained it well. A similar analogy would be breath tech officers at Criminal Court. While the officer receives a fair bit or training on how the intoxilyzer works (far more then an officer receives regarding radars), theyre still not considered experts for Court purposes. The officer is simply a trained operator and can explain how ...

1) Demerit points are applied by the Ministry upon conviction. Your offence carries 6 points.
2) Most likely not. You're expected to drive according to the conditions.
3) If you're convicted of any offence with 4+ demerit points, your licence will be suspended for 30 days.
4) Simply means you were approaching the from the opposite direction it was ...

Much like failing to provide a breath sample, failing to perform the field sobriety testing can result in a criminal charge. The testing consists of different components, so the inability to perform one part of it (i.e. bad knee) shouldn't result in a "fail". Furthermore, if you do fail the test, much like failing a roadside alcohol screening ...

The Compulsory Automobile Insurance Act provides a list of exemptions regarding insurance requirements in Ontario:
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/regu/rro-1990-reg-95/latest/rro-1990-reg-95.html

Basically just Federal and Mennonite vehicles are exempt from the act, though both are still self insured. It's also quite likely that larger ...

- Fight it and lose and get your license suspended for 30 days and possibly receive a small insurance increase.
I'm not certain, but I think the insurance increase in this scenario might be more severe because of the automatic suspension post conviction. I believe it would be considered non-administrative and therefore would also count against ...

Mboudreau wrote:Did that count as an administrative suspension by the way? I'm wondering if I tried to get a car now and get it insured - if they would take me.

No, yours would not be considered an administrative suspension. It's only considered administrative when it's not the result of a conviction.

What specifically do you believe the issue to be, that your disclosure wasnt ready 20 days after the offence? For reference, many defendants wait months to receive disclosure. Did you eventually receive disclosure? If so how long before your trial? As long as you had a reasonable amount of time to review the evidence against you, the Courts wont ...

To be granted an appeal you need to convince the Courts that one of the following occurred:

1) Your conviction was unreasonable or not supported by evidence.
2) The Justice of the Peace made a legal mistake.
3) There was a miscarriage of justice.

Special appeals can also be allowed if there was misconduct on the part of a lawyer or significant ...

It is a 2003 Mercedes C240. It is a sedan owned by our family for quite some time. It is in no way shape or form related to a business or any other commercial reasons. It does not have a C.V.O.R. which is what I think makes it a commercial vehicle?
While there are some exceptions, the HTA generally defines a commercial motor vehicle as "having ...

To clarify, a discrepancy in the word count in your typed version of the notes versus the officer's originals does not mean you caught them in a lie. Like translating from one language to another, when you change short forms and abbreviations into proper English, the word count will fluctuate. As jsherk said, if you think the officer left out ...

My guess is that you received a new e-ticket (printed ticket versus hand written) where the officer typed their notes at the time of the offence instead of writing them out by hand.

If that's the case, they're considered the same as hand written notes in Court and the officer will be allowed to use them on the stand. E-notes should have a date and ...

They have a copy of the chart on the MTO website here: http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/graphics/engli ... t-back.gif

The reports are now in an electronic format but I believe the codes remain unchanged.

The orange and black signs posted by construction crews are not enforceable under section 134 of the HTA. When a road is closed by order of police, no traffic is allowed (i.e. no exemptions for local traffic). While a police officer doesn't need to be present, the closure must be ordered by police and requires special signage.

The required ...

I'm thinking the OP means that her paralegal wants to show the Court that they would have been ready to proceed to trial HAD the Crown provided disclosure. It's a common tactic, show up with your client and claim hardship over the delays caused by the Crown. It arguably adds a bit of theatrics that can sometimes held convince a JP to dismiss ...

It may not seem like it, but the officer probably did exercise some discretion as you certainly could have been charged under various sections of the criminal code or other acts, such as the liquor licence act.

In regards to your actual charges, the HTA makes it an offence to simply possess a fake licence, regardless if you intended to use it or ...