I need some help.
I went to court today in vaughan. The case was pushed off till may 1 2014 as they did not have time to hear my case.
There is video evidence of me going thru the stop sign.
I was wondering if anyone has any experience with filing a motion of non suit if the prosecutors office does not file the by law from the city that establishes the stop sign.??
under section 137 of the HTA is lists the citys must have by laws.
Your thoughts and experience will help!
Stop signs, erection at intersections
137. In addition to stop signs required at intersections on through highways,
(a) the council of a municipality may by by-law provide for the erection of stop signs at intersections on highways under its jurisdiction; and
(b) the Minister may by regulation designate intersections on the KingÃ¢Â€Â™s Highway at which stop signs shall be erected,
and every sign so erected shall comply with the regulations of the Ministry. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 137; 2002, c. 17, Sched. F, Table.
It doesn't say "must" it says "may" have bylaws.
As far as the bylaws being filed with the court, this is usually done right after they are passed.
and then bring a motion of non suit for for the prosecutors not being able to prove its case as the bylaw was not giving to me part of my disclousure?
would this have any weight? or would i be laughed at?