Ontario Highway Traffic Act

This is a Criminal Code Matter.

But since you weren't charged, I think it's safe to hear layman's opinions.

Your rights were violated but it is a permissible violation. If an officer has reasonable and probable grounds (like an occupant handing over 2 roaches or the strong smell of drugs confirmed by a K9) that they believe they may find drugs ...

Though legal, I don't really see the wisdom in passing with a double solid yellow even with clear visibility in that most other drivers driving at the speed limit do not expect to be overtaken and that could cause an issue in itself.

Leave it to lawyers to confuse everyone, now we need a lawyer to decipher if we need a lawyer.
The POA says your agent has to be "licensed" by the law society. The Law Society bylaw certainly does authorize a layperson under certain circumstances to act as a representative. The way I read it, it could be construed that the powers granted to a ...

Super interesting (for me anyway) it's not too often you see a major hole in the law like this. So in theory anyone facing this charge should be able to successfully appeal if convicted even if they were driving a truck that requires a heavy truck license.

Here's something I always wondered about:

I know a commercial truck in most instances is one above 4500 kg but that does not necessarily mean it's a heavy because you can drive any truck up to 11000 kg with a G license.

The question is how is a HEAVY truck defined in relation to a posted NO HEAVY TRUCKS sign on certain streets? Does it only refer ...

There are a few points I wish to state.

In the case of R. v. Mellenthin, [1992] 3 S.C.R. 615, it is stated that "The primary aim of check stop programs, which result in the arbitrary detention of motorists, is to check for sobriety, licences, ownership, insurance and the mechanical fitness of cars"

I do not see how a licence plate would fit any ...

It's one thing to try to raise reasonable doubt through a good cross-examination of the officers testimony, but quite another to take the stand with the intention of telling a bold-faced lie. If you can't tell the truth in your testimony then don't testify, I would try and find another way.

Though it happened in a car this is not an HTA issue you could of had the same charge walking on the sidewalk with a cup.

Bottom line is go to trial and tell your story. Why do you think that the officers believed you had alcohol in the cups if they were empty? A disclosure request will give you additional information.

If you park illegally in Toronto on any major street during rush hour it is almost certain.

Here's the answer to my own question...

178. (1) An order of discharge does not release the bankrupt from
(a) any fine, penalty, restitution order or other order similar in nature to a fine, penalty or restitution order, imposed by a court in respect of an offence, or any debt arising out of a recognizance or bail;

Will being declared bankrupt help?

In Canada all cases are prosecuted by either the Federal or Provincial Crown by a delegate of the respective Attorney General. Serious cases (criminal, complex civil cases, etc.) are handled by a Crown Attorney (lawyer), while professionals (who not necessarily lawyers) who deal exclusively with provincial offences (like the HTA) are referred to as ...

Next time you get pulled over don't try to explain anything to the officer as you might have incriminated yourself.

Start by requesting a trial date indicate you want to challenge the officers evidence at trial, when you get the date, ask for disclosure to see what the evidence against you is and post it here.

Take your full G test in September ...

The only expert is you after this goes down.

The paralegals are right to warn you that your ticket will be amended to the original speed and all the ramifications that come with that.

In the face of such a huge risk for relatively little reward, can you stomach taking a chance to go to court and challenge the officers overall credibility on if ...

Whatever you do, do not agree. Go to court and argue against the adjournment saying that you are ready to proceed and that if the prosecutor is not then the charge should be dismissed or withdrawn.