Search found 380 matches

Insurers do generally provide a discount to individuals 25 or over. Just as they do if you are retired, don't commute to work, have your home insurance also with them, are a university student, have been with them for several years, etc. Those are merely discounts. So, you may qualify for one or more.

However, regardless of how old a person is ...

Unfortunately, it does not appear that the City of Ottawa publishes the actual Transit By-law on their website; only the set fines portion. I was however able to find an older version of their Transit by-law which you can read here .

If you go to section 35, you'll see it discusses Penalties. You'll notice that only a fine (and prohibition order ...

If you're found guilty or plead guilty, then you won't have a clean driving record. You would have the conviction on your driving abstract. The demerit points are removed after 2 years, but your insurance company is able to use the conviction for their purposes for longer. Some use 3 years; others use 5-7 years! Each company is different. So, I'm ...

I'm not quite sure what you want anyone to tell you. The decision really is yours to make.

It all depends upon how much time/energy you are willing to invest in this. While the likelihood of winning these types of cases are usually not much higher than say 30%, that's still enough for some folks to be willing to try their luck. If the officer did ...

They certainly CAN amend up and regularly do so. The Court of Appeal decision in R. v. Winlow allows that. In paragraph 75 of that decision, you will also notice that the court recommends the accused be given an adjournment when they are notified that there will be an amendment to the speed on that day. That is why I stated that you WILL get an ...

Request a trial. Once you receive your notice of trial, request disclosure in writing and pick it up. Then, review the officer's notes for any errors. Then, attend your trial date. You might be one of only a few who get lucky if the officer doesn't show up. Don't expect any offer from the prosecution---in fact, expect that they will amend the ...

Daggx is correct. The set fine is wrong. For section 144(27) the set fine is $35.00 for a total payable of $50.00. As such, do not respond to the ticket and it should be dismissed by the JP as being a fatal error in your absence. If for some reason the JP misses that error and does not dismiss it, then simply appeal the decision and you will win on ...

If you're serious about pursuing this angle, then definitely read up on "highway hypnosis" (aka. white line fever) which may help your case. This superior court decision explains it a bit ( Mason v. Burke ).

Also, be aware that the general basis of your defence is actually a concept called "automatism". Highway hypnosis is merely a form of ...

Keep in mind that I answered your question from a theoretical perspective. Its always a whole different ballgame as to what should be done in practice. First off, you truly don't know if the other person's accident was as a direct result of anything you did or didn't do. Secondly, even so, the other person would have a very difficult time proving ...

Actually, it all depends on a concept called 'foreseeability'. If you knew or ought to have known that the debris was on the road and could negatively affect another person, then you can be held liable. That makes sense from a pubic policy perspective. Otherwise, people would be free to create a safety hazzard for others without any consequences to ...

Your 'optical illusion' argument sounds like a bunch of gibberish. If a person is crossing the road and you think you're seeing an oasis in the horizon or a unicorn----should you escape liability? Of course not! I'd be VERY cautious of raising that type of argument on the record since it logically leads one to question whether your 'optical ...

You're still going to be left with the actual device's readings in evidence. So, if the officer testifies that he/she locked the vehicle with the device within the new speed limit zone, then even if he did not conduct a proper visual estimation (or none at all!) within the new speed limit area, then the case law (as I provided in my earlier post ...

It sounds to me like you are planning to argue the Kologi case principle that since manufacturer instructions require officers to estimate the speed before activating the radar unit, a reasonable doubt is raised on the accuracy of the device where the officer fails to do so. The decision in Hovinga followed and explained it well. However, that was ...

There's no fixed standard. Each officer will clearly have a different threshold---some will be able to estimate speed farther than other. Plus, there are several variables at play such as the distance of the vehicle from the officer, weather, lighting conditions, curves/bumps in the roads, etc. Regardless, unless you plan to sue the officer for ...

... couldnt I ask for them to prove that the camera was in proper working order during the day of the offense?...

Actually, in that offence, the onus is on YOU to provide 'evidence to the contrary' that the vehicle didn't run the red light; not the other way around! They don't have to prove the camera system was working. The mere production of ...

Make sure you properly review Ottawa's parking by-laws. For instance, you can't street park within 300 meters of the same street park location you were at within the previous hour. This rule is in place so as to avoid people simply moving their car and coming right back to the same locale.

Here's an extract of some of the relevant parking rules ...

The prosecution has no power to restrict your driving privileges medically---only the MTO does. Even if you're convicted (which seems extremely unlikely to result if you can corroborate your diagnosis), the JP could only suspend your licence (as part of the sentence for careless driving). That is a form of punishment, whereas a medical suspension ...

I don't think you'll have much difficulty getting acquitted on the careless charge if you've got the medical corroboration for Vasovagal. As I didn't know what your diagnosis was, my concern was whether the MTO was going to medically suspend your licence. However, by the sounds of things, you have already satisfied any concerns the MTO may have ...

You'll definitely need corroboration of your illness from a qualified physician. More than likely, the prosecution will request that the physician appear in person so that they can cross-examine him/her to assess whether they are confident that your illness is what caused your actions at THAT time and not something else like speeding, etc. A ...

Thanks for the scan. I'd never seen one before. Peel region is always so innovative.

I've also never seen such a warning ticket. Can you scan a copy of one (e.g. the careless charge)? Remember to block out any confidential info.

As previously mentioned, definitely retain a lawyer. Anything you say or do on your HTA charge could have significant impact on any claims you need to pursue down the road (e.g. WSIB, insurance benefits, etc.). I'd worry much more about your ability to recover damages and long-term pension benefits then the $400 you'd pay if you're guilty on this ...

You should hire a lawyer ASAP. Beyond the HTA charge, you need to figure out your Worker's Comp benefits/entitlements and whether you'll also be able to sue for the malfunctioning vehicle. It may be that the business that employs you is NOT the same company that provides the vehicles to your employer (thereby removing the restriction from being ...

Thanks for your sharing your story. Its a great example of how NOT to behave when talking to police at a roadside stop, especially if you're just a passenger. A great ending too---the officer only charged you instead of the driver. Karma! They should actually make a promotional video of your scenario.

My apologies. These are the correct links to the Provincial Offences Act and the Courts of Justice Act

The R v. Wilson decision is found here.

There rarely is any one-stop-shop legislation in common law based jurisdictions like Ontario. Rather, you have to refer to many sources of legislation, regulations and case law. You'll therefore need to at least be acquainted with the following (to name the most obvious ones):

Highway Traffic Act
HTA: Seat Belt Regulation
Provincial Offences ...

The simple answer is No. If you really need the mechanic for your case, you can simply ask for a subpoena. The mechanic doesn't get to choose whether to attend or not. Only in very exceptional cases will affidavit evidence be permitted in lieu of viva voce evidence----accommodating the schedule of reluctant witnesses is not one of them!

By the way ...

I agree with what the others have said---I too would disregard the ticket. A lot of errors are currently being worked out of the system on the new 'e-ticket' roll out. Your ticket will therefore likely be dismissed or withdrawn if it is so flagrantly wrong. Such is to be expected when implementing any new system. However, in due time, the system of ...

As you didn't retain the paralegal nor likely instruct them to contact the prosecutor on your behalf, then you SHOULD file a complaint with the Law Society---the paralegal was acting outside of their authority. They should not have interfered with your case. While you likely won't get any compensation out of it, the paralegal should learn from ...

I don't think its fair to jump to conclusions and accusations like that without more details and an understanding of how things are commonly done. First off, did you retain the paralegal (after all, why were they negotiating on your case)? You state they were doing so on behalf of the prosecutor---are you sure that's what happened? Secondly, how ...