Facts: 1st offence - Going to trial in Oct. - Offered plea deal at summons but decided to see what other options I might have. (For non paid ticket) Was offered $500fine for no license. My first question is does the SCC reference re Section 94(2) B.C. Motor Vehicle Act apply as a defense to the charge based on the fact that I could be setenced to jail, and the Act in question therefore violates the principles of Justice (Sec.7 Charter) Has this been used as a defense to driving while suspended given that it's an absolute liability defense? If so, should I file an 11(b) as a Charter challenge? Or do I simply raise this case as precedent to the Justice?
Facts:
1st offence - Going to trial in Oct. - Offered plea deal at summons but decided to see what other options I might have. (For non paid ticket)
Was offered $500fine for no license.
My first question is does the SCC reference re Section 94(2) B.C. Motor Vehicle Act apply as a defense to the charge based on the fact that I could be setenced to jail, and the Act in question therefore violates the principles of Justice (Sec.7 Charter)
Has this been used as a defense to driving while suspended given that it's an absolute liability defense?
If so, should I file an 11(b) as a Charter challenge? Or do I simply raise this case as precedent to the Justice?
Driving under suspension in Ontario is not an absolute liability offence, but rather a strict liability offence. Therefor that particular argument would not apply. And just to clarify, an 11b Charter argument is for unreasonable delay going to trial, not for all Charter violations. If driving under suspension was an absolute liability offence, you'd have to argue for the actual section it violates, which I believe is Section 7.
Driving under suspension in Ontario is not an absolute liability offence, but rather a strict liability offence. Therefor that particular argument would not apply.
And just to clarify, an 11b Charter argument is for unreasonable delay going to trial, not for all Charter violations. If driving under suspension was an absolute liability offence, you'd have to argue for the actual section it violates, which I believe is Section 7.
Ah I understand. Isn't the risk of going to jail merely for an unpaid fine, a violation of the fundamental principles of justice as defined in Sec. 7 of the Charter? Seems unfair to me. What possible defense do I really have under strict liability as compared to absolute?
Ah I understand.
Isn't the risk of going to jail merely for an unpaid fine, a violation of the fundamental principles of justice as defined in Sec. 7 of the Charter? Seems unfair to me.
What possible defense do I really have under strict liability as compared to absolute?
You'd have to research case law, but I'm guessing it's not a violation of Section 7 or it would have been repealed ages ago. There is a slightly higher threshold for charges that may involve incarceration, because unlike regular tickets where if you fail to show you're convicted, there will be a trial held even in your absence prior to any conviction. In regards to strict liability, it simply allows for a possible defence of due diligence. You'd have to show that that you took all reasonable steps to comply with the law and that at the time of the offence you reasonably believed you were licensed. Now that may be easier said then done, so dont take a gamble on a trial unless youre sure you can meet that threshold.
You'd have to research case law, but I'm guessing it's not a violation of Section 7 or it would have been repealed ages ago.
There is a slightly higher threshold for charges that may involve incarceration, because unlike regular tickets where if you fail to show you're convicted, there will be a trial held even in your absence prior to any conviction.
In regards to strict liability, it simply allows for a possible defence of due diligence. You'd have to show that that you took all reasonable steps to comply with the law and that at the time of the offence you reasonably believed you were licensed. Now that may be easier said then done, so dont take a gamble on a trial unless youre sure you can meet that threshold.
The risk of going to jail for drive suspend does not violate s. 7. All the SCC was saying in the BC MV case was that where there is a risk to liberty (where you can go to jail) it can't be for an absolute liability offence. THAT would be a violation of s. 7. As was said, drive suspend is NOT an absolute liability offence, it's strict.
The risk of going to jail for drive suspend does not violate s. 7. All the SCC was saying in the BC MV case was that where there is a risk to liberty (where you can go to jail) it can't be for an absolute liability offence. THAT would be a violation of s. 7. As was said, drive suspend is NOT an absolute liability offence, it's strict.
Hi everyone. I'm asking for a friend who has a question of interpretation.
He was ticketed for using a hand-held device. He contends that he was acting within the exemption provided under Subsection 14 (1) of O. Reg. 366/09, which reads as follows (emphasis added):
Hey guys i just wanted to know what speeds you see others do on the roads on a regular basis. As we all know no body drives 100 km. It seems they only hit that speed twice once on the way up and once on the way down.
it seems the De Facto limit on the 401 is about 120-130. But lately i dont know if…
On June 10, 2017, I was pulled over by an OPP on the 403 heading WB and told I registered 136km/hr. I kept chit chat to a minimum and took my ticket and went on with my day. I later requested my disclosure and did not receive it until a week before my Oct. 27 court date, and so I had my date…
Anyone know any more information? Apparently kathleen wynne mentioned trying to introduce legislation after more than 20 years of no speed cameras. My guess is that it wont happen, since they've tried before many times to bring it back after it was abolished.
The other day I was given a ticket for speeding 119 in a 90, on highway 17 near Marathon, ON (Speeding ticket capital of the universe, BTW). The officer claims to have "clocked" me using the vehicle mounted radar at 121 KMH and dropped it (presumably to lower fine and demerits).
I posted this in the 3 Demerit Section and haven't received any
responses.
I received a failure to stop at an amber light ticket on April 17, 2009. At my First Attendance Meeting I asked to read the police officer's notes and remember thinking how ridiculous they were and the difficulty…
I was on the right side of the road going straight when a pedestrian waved down the taxi driver in the lane next to me. He pulled over to the right without any notice or signalling and hit me with the side of his car.
There were many witnesses but I immediately had a concussion and did not think of…
My mother was driving EB on a 4 lane street (2 lanes EB, 2 lanes WB).
She was in the left hand lane and started a left hand turn so as to enter a side street, crossing WB traffic. There was NO intersection. She hit a cyclist who was heading WB. Police where called but none showed up. My…
If the speed limit is 50, and you do 100+, not only do you get 6 points. Your car gets impounded for a week, and your license suspended for 7 days, along with a hefty fine of at least $2000. The penalty is actually the same as for racing. The law came in effect on October 1, 2007. Remember -…
I was driving westbound on Hwy. 8 earlier this month in North Dumfries Township, approaching the Cambridge city limits. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. I noticed a vehicle on the shoulder on my side of the road, pointing towards me. This didn't concern me right away, as it is a rural…
SCC Reference re Section 94(2) B.C. Motor Vehicle Act
