R. Singh Bal

The Crown applied for certiorari and mandamus to quash a preliminary inquiry judge's order discharging the respondent on a charge of dangerous driving causing death.

The respondent had struck and killed a cyclist after entering an intersection on a red light.

The preliminary inquiry judge found sufficient evidence of the actus reus but discharged the respondent, concluding that his 9-10 seconds of inattention was merely momentary and lacked the requisite mens rea.

The Superior Court found the preliminary inquiry judge committed jurisdictional error by misapprehending the law on mens rea, specifically by focusing solely on the brevity of the inattention rather than whether a reasonable person would foresee the risks, and by failing to consider the whole of the evidence.

The application was granted, the discharge quashed, and the respondent committed for trial.

The appellant appealed her conviction for driving with a blood alcohol concentration over 80mg, arguing her s. 10(b) Charter rights were breached because noise in a police privacy booth prevented meaningful communication with duty counsel.

The trial judge dismissed the application, finding the appellant told police she understood the advice and failed to diligently pursue her rights.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial judge made no error in finding no 'special circumstances' required police to re-advise her of her rights, and that the trial judge's comments about a lack of prior complaints regarding the booth were merely obiter.