Search found 2111 matches

Young drivers are people under 22 with a full licence. Novice drivers are persons of any age with a graduated licence.

And while it says the registrar may suspend, it also says in accordance with the regulation. In other words, it could be suspended, and the registrar is to do what the regulation says. And the regulation says "shall" suspend for ...

Not all novice violations are treated the same. Some don't result in automatic suspensions like the no alcohol requirement.

The zero BAC suspension is covered under section 44.1 of the HTA and section 9 of the driver's licence regulation (O Reg 340/94).

The HTA states the following:
Condition on licence that blood alcohol concentration level be ...

I don't know any way you can avoid the suspension, it's mandated by law and not at the discretion of the Courts.

And just FYI, the G2 has always had a zero BAC requirement since day 1. Its not a new law by any stretch.

Just be aware if they really want to proceed with the charge, they can still proceed by way of summons. If it was a minor charge I'd say that's highly unlikely, but for careless they might depending on the circumstances.

The driver should contact the Ministry to find out what fine resulted in the suspension. Not much that can be done until you know what it's for.

Only the driver of a motor vehicle receives demerit points for seatbelts offences, the passengers do not.

Highway is the legal term for any roadway that can be used by the general public. In regards to signage, typically there are notices posted at the entrances of cities advising of no overnight parking, though I can't speak to Kitchener. I'd say laws like that are pretty common in most cities during the winter months.

I was reading through the Provincial Offences Act for clarification on your second question. While normally trials must be held in the jurisdiction in which the offence occurred, there is the following exception:

A proceeding in respect of an offence may be heard and determined in a county or district that adjoins that in which the offence ...

Police in Ontario can enforce the law anywhere within the Province. So while your situation isn't normal, the officer does have authority to conduct speed enforcement outside the municipal boundaries of Toronto. Was the location right near the Toronto/York border?

If the notes are truly illegible, a request for typed notes is reasonable. In regards to specific details however, that's something you'll simply have to question the officer about at trial.

1) If the radar was not tested, the readings should be excluded as it raises reasonable doubt that the device was operating correctly. The only problem is that the officer may have notes in regards to testing, but failed to disclose them (they tend to copy the notes relating to the stop but sometimes forget the separate testing times). If there are ...

You're only required to report an accident if the damage exceeds $1,000 or there is injury. It doesn't sound like either applies in your case.

As for failing to remain, the HTA charge does not apply on private property but you can be charged criminally.

Its somewhat dependent on the Crown, jurisdiction and time between convictions, but Id say incarceration is very likely. Sentences of 30 days or more are not uncommon. Id strongly suggest seeking some type of representation.

As stated above, this forum doesn't deal with Criminal matters. While one of your charges is from the HTA, it will be dealt with alongside the Criminal matters in Court.

Not sure what you're asking, maybe you can clarify a little. What do you mean by original ticket?

You need some grounds to appeal the conviction on. Based on what you'd said so far, I'm not sure what grounds you have to reopen the matter.

She was actually probably referring to Andrade, not Morin.

What the police officer believes isn't relevant at trial unless he has evidence to support that belief. Careless driving is not a charge I would simply ignore, especially if you weren't driving. If you're mother is willing to testify to the fact she was driving, I think that's very good evidence to the contrary. Your best option is probably to ...

Regardless of the charge or circumstances, the Justice of the Peace should listen to and weigh the evidence of anyone testifying in Court and determine if they find the witness to be credible and their evidence trustworthy.

If youre disputing the fact that you were driving, they most likely would need to call the witness to Court to provide their ...

In regards to speeding, a few points to consider. Quite often police will obtain a speed reading before you see them, the reading wasn't necessarily obtained when you first observed the cruiser. As well, if he showed you the radar reading, I'm assuming it was a handheld unit. With a handheld unit, the officer would simply point it right at your car ...

You are very correct in that it has the WiFi feature which can be used to access data, but this is useless in a vehicle correct?

I'm not sure if there's any case law that lays out what "capable" means. Is it sufficient to state that the device has hardware capable of such a function? Or does the Crown need to show that it's reasonable to believe ...

It might be possible to fight the charge based on the incorrect section. That being said, I think the Crown could argue an iPod is capable of receiving data, e-mail, etc., so subsection 1 could still apply.

If you're convicted for driving under suspension, you can face an additional 6 month suspension.

Might not hurt to consult with a paralegal and see if there's some grounds to fight your charge or have it reduced to something less serious.

I don't believe it would constitute a fatal error. To the best of my knowledge Courts regularly accept tickets with corrections on them. As long as everything is properly crossed out and initialed, I believe the ticket is still valid.

It may be more of an issue that he took the ticket from your hand. In my opinion he had technically already ...

I think you'd have to contact State Farm and see what they say since it will be dependent on your actual policy. Clearly explain the situation to them since they're the ones who will have to provide proof of insurance.

I'm not aware of any requirement for street signs to be visible in the photograph. I think as long as there is some type of location code in the photograph itself it's considered sufficient, but someone else may advise otherwise.

As for road conditions, you won't be able to use that as a defence since it's an absolute liability offence. Basically ...

If you're planning on pleading guilty to the cell phone, I'd enquire about a plea deal. They'll probably drop one charge if you plead to the other.

I dont think it automatically switches between two signals in Canada, it simply displays two readings. One for the strongest signal and one for the faster signal.

Decatur wrote:#2 The Genesis II SD can not display the speed of more than one target at a time.

I thought it could in faster mode. You'd be getting two readings, one for the strongest signal and one for the fastest.

It might depend somewhat on the region and/or actual prosecutor, but in my experience they always bump it back up.