The accused was charged with failing to comply with a breath demand under the Criminal Code and careless driving under the Highway Traffic Act.
During his arrest, the police officer inadvertently recorded the accused's private telephone consultation with duty counsel, which the Crown conceded was a violation of his right to counsel under section 10(b) of the Charter.
The court determined that admitting the evidence of the refusal would bring the administration of justice into disrepute due to the serious breach of solicitor-client privilege, resulting in the exclusion of the refusal evidence and an acquittal on the criminal charge.
However, based on video evidence of aggressive driving and signs of impairment, the court found the accused guilty of the provincial offence of careless driving.
