Christine Rebecca Torr

The accused was charged with impaired operation and refusing a demand for a urine sample following a motor vehicle collision.

The court excluded the accused's roadside utterances under section 7 of the Charter, finding they were statutorily compelled under the Highway Traffic Act, leading to an acquittal on the impaired operation charge.

On the refusal charge, the court found the Crown failed to prove a valid demand because the evaluating officer did not complete the 12-step drug influence evaluation (omitting the breath test) and lacked objectively justifiable reasonable grounds to believe the accused was impaired by drugs, noting the officer fell prey to confirmation bias.

In an impaired driving trial arising from a late-night traffic stop, the accused alleged breaches of ss. 8, 9, and 10(b) of the Charter and sought exclusion of breath readings.

The court held the arrest and breath demand were supported by objectively reasonable grounds, and rejected the claim that police failed to diligently assist access to counsel of choice through the accused's cell phone.

However, the court found a s. 10(b) breach when police were told duty counsel had hung up and failed to offer reconnection or confirm satisfaction with the legal advice received.

Applying the Grant framework, the court excluded the breath results under s. 24(2), dismissed the 80 plus and dangerous operation charges, and convicted on impaired operation based on the officer's observations and video evidence.

The defendant, Gurjeet Buttar, pleaded guilty to careless driving causing death under the Highway Traffic Act following a multi-vehicle collision.

The Crown and Defense proposed a joint submission for a $4,000 fine and a one-year license suspension.

The court rejected this joint submission, finding it insufficient given the gravity of the offense and the catastrophic consequences.

The judge emphasized the paramountcy of deterrence and denunciation, the higher standard of care for commercial truck drivers, and a broad interpretation of "vulnerable person" under HTA §130(6).

The court imposed a sentence of 50 days intermittent custody, 18 months reporting probation, and a three-year driving license suspension, with no fine.