R. v. Primrose

R. v. Primrose

The amendments to s.258(1)(c) are substantive because they remove the practical effect of the Carter defence and thus alter a constitutional right; therefore they do not apply retrospectively and pre-amendment allegations must be judged under the law existing at the time of the offence.

Citation
2008 NSPC 80
Parties
Crown: R.; Accused: Christopher Wayne Primrose
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 December 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Impaired Driving / Provincial Court Decision on Retrospectivity of Bill C 2 Amendments
Outcome
Court concluded the Bill C-2 amendments to s.258(1)(c) are substantive and do not apply retrospectively.
Legal Topics
Impaired Driving, Presumption of Identity, Retrospectivity, Carter Defence, Legislative Amendments (bill C 2)
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Law Impaired Driving Presumption of Identity Retrospectivity Carter Defence Legislative Amendments (bill C 2)

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R.

Crown

Christopher Wayne Primrose

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Impaired Driving / Provincial Court Decision on Retrospectivity of Bill C 2 Amendments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether amendments to s.258(1)(c) of the Criminal Code by Bill C-2 apply retrospectively
  2. 2 Whether the amendments are procedural/evidentiary or substantive
  3. 3 Whether the Carter defence remains sufficient to rebut the presumption of identity

Ratio Decidendi

The amendments to s.258(1)(c) are substantive because they remove the practical effect of the Carter defence and thus alter a constitutional right; therefore they do not apply retrospectively and pre-amendment allegations must be judged under the law existing at the time of the offence.

Court Disposition

Court concluded the Bill C-2 amendments to s.258(1)(c) are substantive and do not apply retrospectively.

Orders

  • Application for direction resolved: amendments are not retrospective; pre-amendment law applies to offences alleged to have occurred May 20, 2006.