Canada Case Law

R. v. Khurana

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Although the trial judge misstated the radar device's target capabilities, that mischaracterization was minor and not material; the conviction was properly based on admissible and reliable evidence (officer's tested radar reading, his fortified visual speed estimate and pacing of vehicles) and the trial judge conducted an adequate W.(D.) credibility analysis without palpable and overriding error; therefore the appeal is dismissed and the conviction stands.

Source excerpt

• Speeding
• Radar evidence
• Visual speed estimates
• Credibility assessment
• Misapprehension of evidence
• Unreasonable verdict

Read case analysis

Singh v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court upheld the Adjudicator's decision as reasonable because the Adjudicator applied the correct standard and burden, cogently preferred the officer's detailed account corroborated by ASD status messages over vague and inconsistently detailed witness statements, and provided transparent reasons for discounting the witnesses, thereby justifying the conclusion that the petitioner failed or refused to provide a valid breath sample.

Source excerpt

• Immediate roadside prohibition
• Approved screening device
• Credibility assessment
• Standard of review
• Burden of proof

Read case analysis

Mayer v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The Adjudicator's credibility determinations and factual findings that the petitioner made multiple insufficient breath attempts and intentionally failed to provide sufficient breath flow were reasonable and supported by the record; the petitioner did not raise a factual basis for a reasonable excuse before the Adjudicator; therefore the IRP, vehicle impoundment and monetary penalty remain in effect and the petition is dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Immediate roadside prohibition
• Breath demand and approved screening device
• Feigned compliance
• Reasonable excuse
• Standard of review (reasonableness)
• Credibility findings

Read case analysis

R. v. Chen

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Leave to appeal dismissed because the proposed grounds do not raise an issue of general importance and have no reasonable possibility of success; the summary conviction appeal judge correctly applied the law that demerit points and independent rideshare employer policies are not legally relevant collateral consequences in these circumstances, and the appellant was aware penalty points would be imposed.

Source excerpt

• Guilty plea validity
• Collateral consequences
• Demerit points
• Gig economy
• Leave to appeal
• Summary conviction appeal

Read case analysis

R. v. Watson

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

A conditional sentence was rejected because the offender's high moral blameworthiness—novice driver with a BAC of 168 mg/100mL, travelling at approximately 118 kph, causing three deaths—meant that community service of a CSO would not adequately satisfy the paramount objectives of denunciation and general deterrence; taking into account mitigating factors including youth, remorse, lack of criminal record, rehabilitation progress and Gladue factors, the appropriate and proportionate sentence was fixed at two years less a day custody, followed by three years probation with strict conditions, a t…

Source excerpt

• Impaired driving causing death (s.320.14(3))
• Gladue factors
• Conditional sentence order
• Driving prohibition
• Victim impact
• Dna order

Read case analysis

R. v. Chen

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

An appeal from a traffic conviction was dismissed after the court held that demerit points and private rideshare policies were not legally relevant collateral consequences.

• Guilty plea validity
• Collateral consequences
• Demerit points
• Appeal and miscarriage of justice
• Self‑represented litigant
• Guilty-plea-validity

Read case analysis

Ontario (Attorney General) v. Cycle Toronto

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The court exercised case management authority to set a timetable that fixed an early hearing date (January 28, 2026) while refusing to abridge the respondents' statutory time to deliver responding materials, ordering perfection by September 22, 2025 and detailed deadlines for intervention materials to ensure a full and fair hearing without conceding expedition at the expense of proper briefing.

Source excerpt

• Charter s.7 (life, liberty and security)
• Charter s.1 justification
• Highway traffic act s.195.6
• Appeal timetabling
• Intervention motions

Read case analysis

R. v. Advincula

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court allowed a traffic conviction appeal after finding the trial was procedurally unfair because the appellant was not told of a potential bias issue and could not be heard on recusal.

• Reasonable apprehension of bias
• Recusal
• Procedural fairness
• Motor vehicle insurance
• Micro-mobility devices
• Procedural-fairness

Read case analysis

R. v. Moshfeghi Zadeh

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal upheld an acquittal for dangerous driving, holding the trial judge’s isolated legal misstatement did not taint her application of the modified objective test.

• Dangerous driving
• Mens rea
• Modified objective test
• Acquittal appeal
• Standard of care
• Dangerous-driving

Read case analysis

R. v. Dancho

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal a refusal to extend time to appeal a guilty plea, finding arguable legal errors in the summary conviction appeal judge’s analysis.

• Extension of time
• Guilty plea withdrawal
• Collateral consequences
• Access to justice
• Procedural fairness
• Leave to appeal

Read case analysis