The accused was charged with operation of a motor vehicle while impaired by a drug following a minor property damage accident.
Police observed signs of impairment and conducted a Drug Recognition Evaluation, which indicated the presence of Lorazepam and an inactive cannabinoid metabolite in the accused's urine.
The Crown sought to prove impairment by drug beyond a reasonable doubt.
The court found that while there was evidence of impairment, the Crown failed to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the impairment was caused by the drugs found in the accused's system, as urine testing cannot reliably determine the timing or concentration of drug ingestion or its effects at the time of driving.
The accused was acquitted.
