The accused was charged with impaired care or control of a motor vehicle and failure to provide a suitable breath sample.
The Crown's case rested on evidence that the accused was found impaired in the driver's seat of his vehicle with keys accessible nearby, and that he deliberately failed to provide a breath sample.
The defence challenged the charges on substantive grounds and also brought a Charter application alleging breaches of sections 7, 9, and 10(a).
The court found that while the Crown had proven both offences beyond a reasonable doubt on the merits, the accused's rights were violated during an unjustified investigative detention that involved excessive force, including handcuffing, forced confinement in a police cruiser, and physical violence.
The court stayed both charges pursuant to section 24(1) of the Charter and the common law doctrine of abuse of process, finding that proceeding with the prosecution would undermine public confidence in the administration of justice.