The appellant appealed her conviction for failing to yield to traffic on a through highway under Section 136(1)(b) of the Highway Traffic Act.
The trial judge had classified the offence as one of absolute liability, rejecting the appellant's due diligence defence.
The appellate court allowed the appeal, holding that the offence is one of strict liability to which a due diligence defence applies.
The court applied the four-factor test from R. v. Sault Ste.
Marie, examining the regulatory pattern, subject matter, penalty, and precision of language.
The matter was remitted for a new trial.
