The accused was charged with operating a motor vehicle with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 80 milligrams per 100 millilitres of blood contrary to section 253(1)(b) of the Criminal Code.
The accused challenged the admissibility of statements made to police at the accident scene, arguing they were statutorily compelled under the Highway Traffic Act and therefore inadmissible as a violation of the right to remain silent under section 7 of the Charter.
The court found that the accused failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that he held an honest and reasonably held belief that he was required by law to report the accident.
The accused's testimony regarding his knowledge of the Highway Traffic Act was found to be not credible, and his statements were therefore admitted into evidence.
