The defendant was charged with careless driving after entering an obstructed intersection and colliding with an oncoming vehicle while attempting a left turn.
Midway through trial, he sought a stay under s. 11(b) of the Charter, arguing that the delay exceeded the Jordan ceiling.
The court held that some of the delay attributable to the early resolution process was defence delay, reducing the net delay below the presumptive ceiling.
On the merits, the court found that entering and accelerating into an intersection without being able to see clearly was a departure from the standard of a reasonably prudent driver, and that reliance on another driver's gesture did not establish due diligence.
