The defendant was charged with exceeding 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood (exceed 80) for an offence occurring on November 25, 2017.
This was a transitional case, as the offence predated the December 18, 2018 amendments to drinking and driving laws, but the trial occurred after those amendments came into force.
The defence raised two arguments: (1) the Shaikh point, contending that the new legislation failed to provide for the continuing applicability of the presumption of identity in transitional cases, requiring expert toxicologist evidence to link blood alcohol test results to the time of driving; and (2) the Flores-Vigil point, challenging whether the Crown had adequately proven the calibration check requirements under the new presumption of accuracy.
The court rejected both arguments and found the defendant guilty as charged.
