Motor Vehicle Offences for Drugs and Alcohol (13:IX) - Revision history

LSLAP at 19:25, 13 October 2025

2025-10-13T19:25:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:25, 13 October 2025
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~August 14, 2024~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= 30 July 2025}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = motor}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = motor}}
	==A. Approved Screening Devices==		==A. Approved Screening Devices==

LSLAP: /* 1. Alcohol in Vehicles */

2025-09-22T07:10:08Z

1. Alcohol in Vehicles

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:10, 22 September 2025
Line 229:		Line 229:
	=== 1. Alcohol in Vehicles ===		=== 1. Alcohol in Vehicles ===

	Section 76 of the Liquor Control and Licensing Act sets out that a person must not drive or otherwise exercise control over the operation of a motor vehicle, whether or not it is in motion, while there is liquor in the person's possession or in the motor vehicle. However, the above does not apply:		Section 76 of the ''Liquor Control and Licensing Act'' sets out that a person must not drive or otherwise exercise control over the operation of a motor vehicle, whether or not it is in motion, while there is liquor in the person's possession or in the motor vehicle. However, the above does not apply:
	:a) If the liquor is in a container that is unbroken and has an unopened seal;		:a) If the liquor is in a container that is unbroken and has an unopened seal;
	:b) If the liquor is being transported, sold or served in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence, authorization or permit; or		:b) If the liquor is being transported, sold or served in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence, authorization or permit; or

LSLAP: /* 3. What Happens if You Lose the Hearing? */

2025-09-22T07:07:09Z

3. What Happens if You Lose the Hearing?

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:07, 22 September 2025
Line 99:		Line 99:
	The administrative decision (review decision) is final. If the application is unsuccessful, the only recourse is through a judicial review. The application for the judicial review must be filed within 6 months of receiving the decision, and is made by filing a Petition in Supreme Court. It is highly recommended that individuals seeking to challenge the administrative decision by way of judicial review be represented by a lawyer.		The administrative decision (review decision) is final. If the application is unsuccessful, the only recourse is through a judicial review. The application for the judicial review must be filed within 6 months of receiving the decision, and is made by filing a Petition in Supreme Court. It is highly recommended that individuals seeking to challenge the administrative decision by way of judicial review be represented by a lawyer.

	The IRP scheme is ~~quasi-criminal~~ and summary in nature, thus subject to Jordan ~~caselaw~~. In Lowe v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) 2022 the petition (for judicial review) was dismissed for unreasonable delay, as 56 months had elapsed between the time the petition was filed, and counsel served a notice of hearing. The petition was dismissed for unreasonable delay~~. R. V. Jordan, 2016 was a landmark case that established a significant shift from past practices of the criminal justice system. Unreasonable delay applies to the Motor Vehicle Act~~.		The IRP scheme is administrative and summary in nature, thus it is not subject to Jordan case law. In Lowe v. British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles) 2022 the petition (for judicial review) was dismissed for unreasonable delay, as 56 months had elapsed between the time the petition was filed, and counsel served a notice of hearing. The petition was dismissed for unreasonable delay.

	===4. 12 and 24-Hour Prohibitions===		===4. 12 and 24-Hour Prohibitions===

LSLAP at 21:02, 21 August 2024

2024-08-21T21:02:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:02, 21 August 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= ~~July 1~~, ~~2023~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= August 14, 2024}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = motor}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = motor}}
	==A. Approved Screening Devices==		==A. Approved Screening Devices==

LSLAP at 23:06, 5 August 2024

2024-08-05T23:06:46Z

Clicklaw Editor: /* 1. Impaired Driving/ Driving Over 80 */

2023-08-15T17:52:40Z

1. Impaired Driving/ Driving Over 80

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:52, 15 August 2023
Line 142:		Line 142:
	Under section 320.31(1), the results from the analyses of breath samples are presumed to be accurate when:		Under section 320.31(1), the results from the analyses of breath samples are presumed to be accurate when:

	*a) The qualified technician, using an approved instrument, conducted a system blank test and a system calibration check before each sample was taken;		:a) The qualified technician, using an approved instrument, conducted a system blank test and a system calibration check before each sample was taken;
	*b) There was an interval of at least 15 minutes between the samples were taken; and		:b) There was an interval of at least 15 minutes between the samples were taken; and
	*c) The results of the analyses rounded down to the nearest multiple of 10mg, did not differ by more than 20mg of alcohol in 100mL of blood.		:c) The results of the analyses rounded down to the nearest multiple of 10mg, did not differ by more than 20mg of alcohol in 100mL of blood.

	The results of blood sample analyses are also presumed to be accurate unless there is evidence to the contrary (s 320.31 (2)).		The results of blood sample analyses are also presumed to be accurate unless there is evidence to the contrary (s 320.31 (2)).

Clicklaw Editor: /* 1. Alcohol in Vehicles */

2023-08-15T17:51:48Z

1. Alcohol in Vehicles

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:51, 15 August 2023
Line 231:		Line 231:

	Section 76 of the Liquor Control and Licensing Act sets out that a person must not drive or otherwise exercise control over the operation of a motor vehicle, whether or not it is in motion, while there is liquor in the person's possession or in the motor vehicle. However, the above does not apply:		Section 76 of the Liquor Control and Licensing Act sets out that a person must not drive or otherwise exercise control over the operation of a motor vehicle, whether or not it is in motion, while there is liquor in the person's possession or in the motor vehicle. However, the above does not apply:
	*a) If the liquor is in a container that is unbroken and has an unopened seal;		:a) If the liquor is in a container that is unbroken and has an unopened seal;
	*b) If the liquor is being transported, sold or served in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence, authorization or permit; or		:b) If the liquor is being transported, sold or served in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence, authorization or permit; or
	*c) If the liquor is not readily accessible by the driver and passengers.		:c) If the liquor is not readily accessible by the driver and passengers.

	Violation of section 76 of the Liquor Control and Licensing Act can result in being issued a ticket for $230.		Violation of section 76 of the Liquor Control and Licensing Act can result in being issued a ticket for $230.

	=== 2. Cannabis in Vehicles ===		=== 2. Cannabis in Vehicles ===

Clicklaw Editor: /* 2. Cannabis in Vehicles */

2023-08-15T17:51:07Z

2. Cannabis in Vehicles

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:51, 15 August 2023
Line 246:		Line 246:

	Section 81 of the Cannabis Control and Licensing Act sets out that an adult must not operate a vehicle while the adult has personal possession of cannabis or there is cannabis in the vehicle. However, the above does not apply:		Section 81 of the Cannabis Control and Licensing Act sets out that an adult must not operate a vehicle while the adult has personal possession of cannabis or there is cannabis in the vehicle. However, the above does not apply:
	*a) If the cannabis was produced by a federal license holder and is still in its original unopened packaging;		:a) If the cannabis was produced by a federal license holder and is still in its original unopened packaging;
	*b) If the cannabis is not readily accessible to the driver and any passengers in the vehicle; or		:b) If the cannabis is not readily accessible to the driver and any passengers in the vehicle; or
	*c) If one or more cannabis plants are not budding or flowering.		:c) If one or more cannabis plants are not budding or flowering.

	Violation of section 81 can result in being issued a ticket for $230.		Violation of section 81 can result in being issued a ticket for $230.


	{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters8-14}}		{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters8-14}}

LSLAP at 18:41, 8 August 2023

2023-08-08T18:41:55Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:41, 8 August 2023
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= July 4, ~~2022~~}}		{{REVIEWED LSLAP \| date= July 1, 2023}}
	{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = motor}}		{{LSLAP Manual TOC\|expanded = motor}}
	==A. Approved Screening Devices==		==A. Approved Screening Devices==
Line 6:		Line 6:

	Since the enactment of Bill C-46 in December 2018, a police officer is also allowed to demand a mandatory breath sample from a driver at any time. This demand does not require the officer to have reasonable grounds to believe the driver is impaired—they can ask any driver to provide a mandatory sample. This type of demand only applies to roadside tests, not tests where the individual needs to be transported to the police station. The driver does not have a right to consult with counsel before providing a mandatory demand breath sample. There are some requirements for an officer to make a mandatory demand:		Since the enactment of Bill C-46 in December 2018, a police officer is also allowed to demand a mandatory breath sample from a driver at any time. This demand does not require the officer to have reasonable grounds to believe the driver is impaired—they can ask any driver to provide a mandatory sample. This type of demand only applies to roadside tests, not tests where the individual needs to be transported to the police station. The driver does not have a right to consult with counsel before providing a mandatory demand breath sample. There are some requirements for an officer to make a mandatory demand:
	:a) ~~the~~ officer must have an ASD in their possession when they ask the driver to provide the sample; and		:a) The officer must have an ASD in their possession when they ask the driver to provide the sample; and

	:b) ~~the~~ officer must ask for the sample when the driver is driving or in care and control of a motor vehicle (they can pull a driver over and ask for a sample, but they cannot make a mandatory demand after the driver stops driving, like after they get home).		:b) The officer must ask for the sample when the driver is driving or in care and control of a motor vehicle (they can pull a driver over and ask for a sample, but they cannot make a mandatory demand after the driver stops driving, like after they get home).

	Before requiring the driver to provide a roadside breath sample into an ASD, the peace officer does not have to inform the driver of their ''Charter'' right, under s 10(b), to consult a lawyer. At this time, the driver does not have the right to speak to a lawyer before deciding whether to blow or refuse: the driver must decide right away. If the driver refuses, they will likely be issued a refusal to provide a breath sample under s 215.41(4) of the ''Motor Vehicle Act'' or under s 320.15(1) of the ''Criminal Code'' or an Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP).		Before requiring the driver to provide a roadside breath sample into an ASD, the peace officer does not have to inform the driver of their ''Charter'' right, under s 10(b), to consult a lawyer. At this time, the driver does not have the right to speak to a lawyer before deciding whether to blow or refuse: the driver must decide right away. If the driver refuses, they will likely be issued a refusal to provide a breath sample under s 215.41(4) of the ''Motor Vehicle Act'' or under s 320.15(1) of the ''Criminal Code'' or an Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP).
Line 94:		Line 94:
	For more information on the monetary penalty and potential referral to remedial driving programs, see: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/roadsafetybc/prohibitions/alcohol		For more information on the monetary penalty and potential referral to remedial driving programs, see: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/roadsafetybc/prohibitions/alcohol

	=== 3. What Happens if ~~you~~ Lose the Hearing? ===		=== 3. What Happens if You Lose the Hearing? ===

	The administrative decision (review decision) is final. If the application is unsuccessful, the only recourse is through a judicial review. The application for the judicial review must be filed within 6 months of receiving the decision, and is made by filing a Petition in Supreme Court. It is highly recommended that individuals seeking to challenge the administrative decision by way of judicial review be represented by a lawyer.		The administrative decision (review decision) is final. If the application is unsuccessful, the only recourse is through a judicial review. The application for the judicial review must be filed within 6 months of receiving the decision, and is made by filing a Petition in Supreme Court. It is highly recommended that individuals seeking to challenge the administrative decision by way of judicial review be represented by a lawyer.
Line 184:		Line 184:
	Under Criminal Code s 320.19(1), impaired driving is a hybrid offence. For both summary and indictment, the minimum punishments are the same:		Under Criminal Code s 320.19(1), impaired driving is a hybrid offence. For both summary and indictment, the minimum punishments are the same:

	:(i) ~~for~~ a first offence, a fine of $1,000,		:(i) For a first offence, a fine of $1,000,

	:(ii) ~~for~~ a second offence, a term of imprisonment for a term of 30 days, and		:(ii) For a second offence, a term of imprisonment for a term of 30 days, and

	:(iii) ~~for~~ each subsequent offence, imprisonment for a term of 120 days.		:(iii) For each subsequent offence, imprisonment for a term of 120 days.

	The court does not have to impose the minimum sentence if the accused successfully completes a treatment program (s 320.23(2)). If convicted of an indictable offence under s 320.19(1), the accused may be liable to imprisonment for a maximum term of 10 years. If convicted on summary conviction, the accused may be liable for a fine of not more than $5,000, imprisonment for a maximum term of 2 years less a day, or both.		The court does not have to impose the minimum sentence if the accused successfully completes a treatment program (s 320.23(2)). If convicted of an indictable offence under s 320.19(1), the accused may be liable to imprisonment for a maximum term of 10 years. If convicted on summary conviction, the accused may be liable for a fine of not more than $5,000, imprisonment for a maximum term of 2 years less a day, or both.
Line 199:		Line 199:
	If you are convicted of a federal criminal impaired driving or refusal offence under ss 320.14(1) or 320.15(1) of the Criminal Code, you may be prohibited from driving as follows (s 320.24(1)):		If you are convicted of a federal criminal impaired driving or refusal offence under ss 320.14(1) or 320.15(1) of the Criminal Code, you may be prohibited from driving as follows (s 320.24(1)):

	* ~~upon~~ 1st Conviction — not less than 1 year and not more than 3 years, plus the entirety of the period of time that the offender is imprisoned		* Upon 1st Conviction — not less than 1 year and not more than 3 years, plus the entirety of the period of time that the offender is imprisoned;

	* ~~upon~~ 2nd Conviction — not less than 2 years and not more than 10 years, plus the entirety of the period of time that the offender is imprisoned		* Upon 2nd Conviction — not less than 2 years and not more than 10 years, plus the entirety of the period of time that the offender is imprisoned;

	* ~~upon~~ 3rd Conviction and any subsequent convictions after that — not less than 3 years, plus the entirety of the period of time that the offender is imprisoned (there is no maximum period)		* Upon 3rd Conviction and any subsequent convictions after that — not less than 3 years, plus the entirety of the period of time that the offender is imprisoned (there is no maximum period).

	Note that these prohibitions are in addition to any other penalty that applies.		Note that these prohibitions are in addition to any other penalty that applies.
Line 226:		Line 226:
	* I had a reasonable excuse for failing or refusing to comply with a demand under section 320.15 of the Criminal Code to supply a breath or blood sample.		* I had a reasonable excuse for failing or refusing to comply with a demand under section 320.15 of the Criminal Code to supply a breath or blood sample.

			==E. Alcohol and Cannabis in Vehicles==

			=== 1. Alcohol in Vehicles ===

			Section 76 of the Liquor Control and Licensing Act sets out that a person must not drive or otherwise exercise control over the operation of a motor vehicle, whether or not it is in motion, while there is liquor in the person's possession or in the motor vehicle. However, the above does not apply:
			*a) If the liquor is in a container that is unbroken and has an unopened seal;
			*b) If the liquor is being transported, sold or served in accordance with the terms and conditions of a licence, authorization or permit; or
			*c) If the liquor is not readily accessible by the driver and passengers.

			Violation of section 76 of the Liquor Control and Licensing Act can result in being issued a ticket for $230.

			=== 2. Cannabis in Vehicles ===

			Section 65 of the Cannabis Control and Licensing Act sets out that cannabis cannot be consumed while a vehicle or boat is being operated. Neither the driver nor passenger can consumer cannabis whether the vehicle is in motion or not.

			* Consuming cannabis while operating a vehicle or boat can result in a ticket of $575;
			* Consuming cannabis in a vehicle or boat operated by another person can result in a ticket of $230;
			* Operating a vehicle or boat while knowing that another person is smoking or vaping cannabis in it can result in a ticket of $230.

			Section 81 of the Cannabis Control and Licensing Act sets out that an adult must not operate a vehicle while the adult has personal possession of cannabis or there is cannabis in the vehicle. However, the above does not apply:
			*a) If the cannabis was produced by a federal license holder and is still in its original unopened packaging;
			*b) If the cannabis is not readily accessible to the driver and any passengers in the vehicle; or
			*c) If one or more cannabis plants are not budding or flowering.

			Violation of section 81 can result in being issued a ticket for $230.

	{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters8-14}}		{{LSLAP Manual Navbox\|type=chapters8-14}}

Clicklaw Editor: /* 4. Penalties */

2022-09-20T18:56:15Z

4. Penalties

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:56, 20 September 2022
Line 184:		Line 184:
	Under Criminal Code s 320.19(1), impaired driving is a hybrid offence. For both summary and indictment, the minimum punishments are the same:		Under Criminal Code s 320.19(1), impaired driving is a hybrid offence. For both summary and indictment, the minimum punishments are the same:

	*(i) for a first offence, a fine of $1,000,		:(i) for a first offence, a fine of $1,000,

	*(ii) for a second offence, a term of imprisonment for a term of 30 days, and		:(ii) for a second offence, a term of imprisonment for a term of 30 days, and

	*(iii) for each subsequent offence, imprisonment for a term of 120 days.		:(iii) for each subsequent offence, imprisonment for a term of 120 days.

	The court does not have to impose the minimum sentence if the accused successfully completes a treatment program (s 320.23(2)). If convicted of an indictable offence under s 320.19(1), the accused may be liable to imprisonment for a maximum term of 10 years. If convicted on summary conviction, the accused may be liable for a fine of not more than $5,000, imprisonment for a maximum term of 2 years less a day, or both.		The court does not have to impose the minimum sentence if the accused successfully completes a treatment program (s 320.23(2)). If convicted of an indictable offence under s 320.19(1), the accused may be liable to imprisonment for a maximum term of 10 years. If convicted on summary conviction, the accused may be liable for a fine of not more than $5,000, imprisonment for a maximum term of 2 years less a day, or both.

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:06, 5 August 2024
Line 3:		Line 3:
	==A. Approved Screening Devices==		==A. Approved Screening Devices==

	Pursuant to s 320.27(1) of the ''Criminal Code'', a peace officer may demand a breath sample into an Approved Screening Device (ASD) from a driver if the officer reasonably suspects that there is alcohol in the driver’s body and they have operated a motor vehicle within the ~~preceding~~ 3 hours. This is permitted for both drivers who are operating a motor vehicle or have care or control of it. An ASD is different than a breathalyser ~~device~~ at the police station and it does not provide a numerical value for the readings of “warn” or ~~“fail”~~. If the police do not administer the ASD right away, they may not be able to use the ~~result's~~ readings at trial.		Pursuant to s 320.27(1) of the ''Criminal Code'', a peace officer may demand a breath sample into an Approved Screening Device (ASD) from a driver if the officer reasonably suspects that there is alcohol in the driver’s body and they have operated a motor vehicle within the proceeding 3 hours. This is permitted for both drivers who are operating a motor vehicle or have care or control of it. An ASD is different than an approved instrument (colloquially known as a breathalyser) at the police station and it does not provide a numerical value for the readings of “warn” or “fail." If the police do not administer the ASD right away, they may not be able to use the results readings at trial.

			Since the enactment of Bill C-46 in December 2018, police officers are also allowed to demand mandatory breath samples from a driver. This demand does not require the officer to have reasonable grounds to believe the driver is impaired—they can ask any driver to provide a mandatory sample. This type of demand only applies to roadside tests, not tests where the individual needs to be transported to the police station. The driver does not have a right to consult with counsel before providing a mandatory demand breath sample. There are some requirements for an officer to make a mandatory demand:

	Since the enactment of Bill C-46 in December 2018, a police officer is also allowed to demand a mandatory breath sample from a driver at any time. This demand does not require the officer to have reasonable grounds to believe the driver is impaired—they can ask any driver to provide a mandatory sample. This type of demand only applies to roadside tests, not tests where the individual needs to be transported to the police station. The driver does not have a right to consult with counsel before providing a mandatory demand breath sample. There are some requirements for an officer to make a mandatory demand:
	:a) The officer must have an ASD in their possession when they ask the driver to provide the sample; and		:a) The officer must have an ASD in their possession when they ask the driver to provide the sample; and

	:b) The officer must ask for the sample when the driver is driving or in care and control of a motor vehicle (they can pull a driver over and ask for a sample, but they cannot make a mandatory demand after the driver stops driving, like after they get home).		:b) The officer must ask for the sample when the driver is driving or in care and control of a motor vehicle (they can pull a driver over and ask for a sample, but they cannot make a mandatory demand after the driver stops driving, like after they get home).

	Before requiring the driver to provide a roadside breath sample into an ASD, the peace officer does not have to inform the driver of their ''Charter'' right, under s 10(b), to consult a lawyer. At this time, the driver does not have the right to speak to a lawyer before deciding whether to blow or refuse: the driver must decide right away. If the driver refuses, they will likely be issued a refusal to provide a breath sample under s 215.41(4) of the ''Motor Vehicle Act'' or under s 320.15(1) of the ''Criminal Code'' or an Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP).		Before requiring the driver to provide a roadside breath sample into an ASD, the peace officer does not have to inform the driver of their Charter right, under s 10(b), to consult a lawyer. At this time, the driver does not have the right to speak to a lawyer before deciding whether to blow or refuse: the driver must decide right away. If the driver refuses, they will likely be issued a refusal to provide a breath sample under s 215.41(4) of the ''Motor Vehicle Act'' or under s 320.15(1) of the ''Criminal Code'' or an Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP).

	The ASD tests for alcohol in the body and it will show a numerical value for a blood alcohol content (“BAC”) under 50 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood (.05), “warn,” or “fail.” It shows a ~~warn~~ for blood-alcohol levels between 50 and 79 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood (.05), and a ~~fail~~ for levels of not less than 80 milligrams. No numerical values are given for a “warn” or a “fail” and it is impossible to determine the actual BAC of the driver.		The ASD tests for alcohol in the body and it will show a numerical value for a blood alcohol content (“BAC”) under 50 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood (.05), “warn,” or “fail.” It shows a “warn” for blood-alcohol levels between 50 and 79 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood (.05), and a “fail” for levels of not less than 80 milligrams. No numerical values are given for a “warn” or a “fail” and it is impossible to determine the actual BAC of the driver.

	In contrast, ~~a breathalyser machine~~ measures alcohol in the breath to see if the driver’s blood alcohol concentration is over the legal limit of .08. It is more accurate than the ASD and must be operated by a qualified technician. In practice, the ~~breathalyser~~ is no longer used, and the police rely solely on the ASD to form the basis of issuing the driving prohibition.		In contrast, an approved instrument measures alcohol in the breath to see if the driver’s blood alcohol concentration is over the legal limit of .08. It is more accurate than the ASD and must be operated by a qualified technician. In practice, the approved instrument is no longer used, and the police rely solely on the ASD to form the basis of issuing the driving prohibition. The exception to this is in criminal cases, where the ASD cannot be relied upon for prosecution or proof of any level of blood alcohol content.

	In summary, if the police demand a roadside breath sample, the driver must comply with the breath demand into the ASD. The driver is legally compelled to provide a breath sample unless there is a reasonable excuse not to do so. Refusing without a reasonable excuse constitutes a separate offence.		In summary, if the police demand a roadside breath sample, the driver must comply with the breath demand into the ASD. The driver is legally compelled to provide a breath sample unless there is a reasonable excuse not to do so. Refusing without a reasonable excuse constitutes a separate offence.
Line 20:		Line 21:
	== B. Provincial Roadside Driving Prohibitions==		== B. Provincial Roadside Driving Prohibitions==

	Under the ''Motor Vehicle Act'' s 215.41, an immediate roadside prohibition will be served for driving or being in the care or control of a motor vehicle with a blood-alcohol reading in excess of 50 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood (.05). Care or control of a vehicle means occupying the driver’s seat with access to the ignition key, even if the vehicle is parked.		Under the Motor Vehicle Act s 215.4, an immediate roadside prohibition will be served for driving or being in the care or control of a motor vehicle with a blood-alcohol reading in excess of 50 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood (.05). Care or control of a vehicle means occupying the driver’s seat with access to the ignition key, even if the vehicle is parked.

	The consequence depends on a number of circumstances, including a driver’s prior history of prohibitions. For clarity, these consequences are listed below. Beyond the penalties noted below, receiving multiple penalties, or just one 90-day driving prohibition or ''Criminal Code'' penalty, can result in referral to the Responsible Driving Program (RDP), or the Ignition Interlock Program (IIP). The RDP is a course taken over 8 or 16 hours, whereas the IIP requires the installation of an interlock device in the driver’s vehicle. For more information, consult the [https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/roadsafetybc/high-risk-driver Road Safety BC website].		The consequence depends on a number of circumstances, including a driver’s prior history of prohibitions. For clarity, these consequences are listed below. Beyond the penalties noted below, receiving multiple penalties, or just one 90-day driving prohibition or Criminal Code penalty, can result in referral to the Responsible Driving Program (RDP), or the Ignition Interlock Program (IIP). The RDP is a course taken over 8 or 16 hours, whereas the IIP requires the installation of an interlock device in the driver’s vehicle. For more information, consult the RoadSafetyBC website at [https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/driving-and-cycling/roadsafetybc/high-risk-driver Road Safety BC website].

	===1. Immediate Roadside Prohibitions===		===1. Immediate Roadside Prohibitions===
Line 116:		Line 117:
	==C. Drug Offences==		==C. Drug Offences==

	~~The BC government has passed legislation amending the ''MVA'' which received royal assent on May 17, 2018, and has come into force by regulation of the Lieutenant Governor in Council.~~		Section 25(10.101) allows the Lieutenant Governor in Council to impose a condition on driver’s licenses that those who hold the license must not operate a motor vehicle while having a prescribed drug in their body.

	~~The new legislation includes a number of amendments.~~ Section 25(10.101) allows the Lieutenant Governor in Council to impose a condition on driver’s licenses that those who hold the license must not operate a motor vehicle while having a prescribed drug in their body.

	Section 90.3(2.1) allows a peace officer to demand a sample of a bodily substance from a driver who holds a driver's ~~licence~~ on which a condition is imposed under section 25 (10.101) for analysis by means of approved drug screening equipment. If the analysis indicates the driver has a prescribed drug in their body, the peace officer may serve them with a notice of license suspension and request the driver to surrender their license. Section 90.3(3) ~~allows~~ the peace officer to apply the same consequence to a driver who declines to provide such a sample.		Section 90.3(2.1) allows a peace officer to demand a sample of a bodily substance from a driver who holds a driver's license on which a condition is imposed under section 25 (10.101) for analysis by means of approved drug screening equipment. If the analysis indicates the driver has a prescribed drug in their body, the peace officer may serve them with a notice of license suspension and request the driver to surrender their license. Section 90.3(3) allow the peace officer to apply the same consequence to a driver who declines to provide such a sample.

	Similar amendments alter much of the ''MVA'' regulations for driving with alcohol in your system so that driving with a prescribed drug in your system can result in the same penalties. There is no blood drug concentration specified yet. It will be possible for a combination of drugs and alcohol to trigger penalties even if the blood concentration of each substance is less than the legal limit (section 94.1).		Similar amendments alter much of the ''MVA'' regulations for driving with alcohol in your system so that driving with a prescribed drug in your system can result in the same penalties. There is no blood drug concentration specified yet. It will be possible for a combination of drugs and alcohol to trigger penalties even if the blood concentration of each substance is less than the legal limit (section 94.1).

	==D. Federal Alcohol Offences==		==D. Federal Alcohol Offences==