Anonymous

Governing Legislation and Resources for Motor Vehicle Law (13:II): Difference between revisions

From Clicklaw Wikibooks
(Created page with "{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = motor}} == A. Provincial Driving Offences == === 1. Authority of Peace Officers === According to the Supreme Court of Canada in ''R v Ladouceu...")
 
Line 12: Line 12:
*c) whom the officer has reasonable and probable cause to believe has contravened MVA s 68 (leaving the scene of an accident) (s 70(c)) and may detain the person until he or she can be brought before a justice.
*c) whom the officer has reasonable and probable cause to believe has contravened MVA s 68 (leaving the scene of an accident) (s 70(c)) and may detain the person until he or she can be brought before a justice.


2.Procedure NOTE:               MVA s 124 gives municipalities authority to create motor vehicle bylaws on matters such as parking and to enforce them by fine or  imprisonment under s 124(1)(u). Municipalities cannot use this authority with respect to speeding (s 124(2)). An individual charged with a  bylaw offence will receive a bylaw infraction notice or a Municipal Ticket Information. While the following generally applies to these offences, special procedures may be imposed. Follow the procedures outlined on the bylaw infraction notice or Municipal Ticket Information. An  individual  charged  with  a  provincial  offence  will  likely  receive  a  violation  ticket  issued under  s  14  of  the OA. However,  under  s  11  of  the OA,  an  Information  can  also  be  laid against  the  accused.  This is  for  serious  offences  such  as  MVA  ss  95  and  102  (driving while prohibited). Court attendance is compulsory when an Information is laid, but, in the case of a violation ticket, court attendance is only required if a violation ticket is disputed. A  special  procedure  for  adjudicating  violation  tickets  is  set  out  in  ss  14-18  of  the OA. To dispute  a  violation  ticket,  one  must  either  appear  in person  at  any  Motor  License  Office, Government  Agent’ s  Office,  or  Provincial  Court  Registry  with  a  copy  of the  Violation Ticket  or  mail  a  copy  of  the  Violation  Ticket  to:  Ticket  Dispute  Processing,  Bag  #3510, Victoria, BC, V8W 3P7. The notice of dispute must contain the address of the accused and sufficient  information  to  identify  the  violation  ticket  and  the  alleged  contravention  or  fine disputed (OA s 15(3)).A person has 30 days to make his or her intention to dispute known (OA s 15(1)). Read the reverse side of violation tickets as these regulations and procedures may change from time  to  time.  If  a  client  does  not  dispute  the  violation  ticket  within  30  days,  he  or  she  is deemed to have pled guilty under OA s 16. A person still has 14 days to appear before a justice, with  an  affidavit,  to  state  why  it  was  not  his  or  her fault  that  the  deadline  was  missed  (OAs 16(2)). A violation  ticket dispute is heard in Provincial Court  by a judge  or justice  of  the peace who, after  hearing  the evidence, determines whether  or  not the violation  took  place.  If  an  accused misses the Provincial Court hearing, he or she has 30 days to appear before a justice, with an affidavit, to explain why he or she missed the hearing (OA s 15(9.1)).In challenging a ticket, it is important to:  Appear  at  the  appointed  time.  There  is  always  the  possibility the  peace  officer  will  not appear and the case will be dismissed due to lack of evidence. Read the relevant sections of the MVA to determine the elements of the offence and, if the  Crown  fails  to  lead evidence  on  any  of  these elements, motion  for  dismissal  at  the conclusion of the Crown’ s presentation. The evidence must include identification of the alleged  offender  by  name  and  address  as  well  as  the  time, date,  and  location  of  the offence. Pursuant  to  provisions  in  the OA,  the  Crown  can  easily  amend  most  mistakes  on Violation Tickets. If  the  offender  can  show  economic  hardship,  the  judge  has  the  power  to  reduce  the fine.  Section 88  of  the OA  states  that  the fine can  be  reduced  based  on  the  offender’ s means and ability to pay, subject to minimum fines specified in the MVA. Consider whether the offence is strict or absolute liability. If the offence is strict liability, consider  whether  the  accused  may  have  the  defence  of  due  diligence.  Generally,  this
=== 2. Procedure ===
 
'''NOTE:''' MVA s 124 gives municipalities authority to create motor vehicle bylaws on matters such as parking and to enforce them by fine or  imprisonment under s 124(1)(u). Municipalities cannot use this authority with respect to speeding (s 124(2)). An individual charged with a  bylaw offence will receive a bylaw infraction notice or a Municipal Ticket Information. While the following generally applies to these offences, special procedures may be imposed. '''Follow the procedures outlined on the bylaw infraction notice or Municipal Ticket Information.'''
 
An  individual  charged  with  a  provincial  offence  will  likely  receive  a  violation  ticket  issued under  s  14  of  the OA. However,  under  s  11  of  the OA,  an  Information  can  also  be  laid against  the  accused.  This is  for  serious  offences  such  as  MVA  ss  95  and  102  (driving while prohibited). Court attendance is compulsory when an Information is laid, but, in the case of a violation ticket, court attendance is only required if a violation ticket is disputed. A  special  procedure  for  adjudicating  violation  tickets  is  set  out  in  ss  14-18  of  the OA. To dispute  a  violation  ticket,  one  must  either  appear  in person  at  any  Motor  License  Office, Government  Agent’ s  Office,  or  Provincial  Court  Registry  with  a  copy  of the  Violation Ticket  or  mail  a  copy  of  the  Violation  Ticket  to:  Ticket  Dispute  Processing,  Bag  #3510, Victoria, BC, V8W 3P7. The notice of dispute must contain the address of the accused and sufficient  information  to  identify  the  violation  ticket  and  the  alleged  contravention  or  fine disputed (OA s 15(3)).A person has 30 days to make his or her intention to dispute known (OA s 15(1)). Read the reverse side of violation tickets as these regulations and procedures may change from time  to  time.  If  a  client  does  not  dispute  the  violation  ticket  within  30  days,  he  or  she  is deemed to have pled guilty under OA s 16. A person still has 14 days to appear before a justice, with  an  affidavit,  to  state  why  it  was  not  his  or  her fault  that  the  deadline  was  missed  (OAs 16(2)). A violation  ticket dispute is heard in Provincial Court  by a judge  or justice  of  the peace who, after  hearing  the evidence, determines whether  or  not the violation  took  place.  If  an  accused misses the Provincial Court hearing, he or she has 30 days to appear before a justice, with an affidavit, to explain why he or she missed the hearing (OA s 15(9.1)).In challenging a ticket, it is important to:  Appear  at  the  appointed  time.  There  is  always  the  possibility the  peace  officer  will  not appear and the case will be dismissed due to lack of evidence. Read the relevant sections of the MVA to determine the elements of the offence and, if the  Crown  fails  to  lead evidence  on  any  of  these elements, motion  for  dismissal  at  the conclusion of the Crown’ s presentation. The evidence must include identification of the alleged  offender  by  name  and  address  as  well  as  the  time, date,  and  location  of  the offence. Pursuant  to  provisions  in  the OA,  the  Crown  can  easily  amend  most  mistakes  on Violation Tickets. If  the  offender  can  show  economic  hardship,  the  judge  has  the  power  to  reduce  the fine.  Section 88  of  the OA  states  that  the fine can  be  reduced  based  on  the  offender’ s means and ability to pay, subject to minimum fines specified in the MVA. Consider whether the offence is strict or absolute liability. If the offence is strict liability, consider  whether  the  accused  may  have  the  defence  of  due  diligence.  Generally,  this