The defendant was charged with having care or control of a motor vehicle with liquor readily available contrary to section 32(1) of the Liquor Licence Act.
The defendant was found in the driver's seat of a vehicle with an open can of beer in the passenger's hand and another open can of beer in the back seat.
The defendant argued that he did not have care or control of the vehicle and relied on the Criminal Code definition of care or control from R. v. Toews.
The court rejected this argument, finding that the plain and ordinary meaning of care or control should apply in the regulatory context of the Liquor Licence Act, not the Criminal Code definition.
The court found the defendant guilty, as he was occupying the driver's seat, admitted to being the driver, had control of his keys, and made no effort to prevent his passenger from consuming liquor in the vehicle.
