The appellant was charged with refusing to comply with a demand to provide a breath sample.
At trial, the Crown conceded the availability of the defence of extreme intoxication akin to automatism, and the accused was acquitted.
The Court of Appeal for Quebec set aside the acquittal and entered a conviction, doing so by raising and deciding the availability of the defence despite the Crown's concession.
The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal erred in raising and deciding the availability of the defence in view of the Crown's concession.
Given the unusual circumstances, it was not in the interests of justice to overturn the acquittal, and the Court expressly refrained from deciding the availability of the defence on the merits in the absence of an adequate record on the constitutional issues.
