Blog

We are waiting to see. If it comes at the end of the day, there will be little to do until next Wednesday when Government offices re-open. Check the Court website to see if it has been posted: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/supreme_court/recent_judgments.aspx  

We expect a decision from the Court today concerning the application of the November 30th ruling in which the 90-day IRP/ARP law was held to be unconstitutional. What will it mean? We will tell you when we see it. One way or another, we doubt it will resolve the issue of outstanding IRPs or provide

A suggestion the Government seems to make by hammering one single statistic out of context is that recidivists are responsible for drunk driving deaths and therefore we should conclude that the IRP law stopped repeat drunk drivers. That would be the only way the decrease could be attributed to the IRP scheme. And bearing in

The Court heard submissions with respect to what should happen now that the 90-day Immediate Roadside Prohibition scheme has been found unconstitutional. The Justice indicated that he understood that there is a desire for a prompt decision. The issues are complex, however, so we do not expect a decision until early January at the soonest.

Between September 20, 2010 and November 30, 2011, simply being in British Columbia was a high-stakes game of chance. If a police officer claimed that an unidentified witness claimed you drove, that was good enough to prove you were a driver. Time of driving didn’t matter, so long as there was no suggestion that you

The Globe and Mail reported Saturday that the Government expects to argue that 90-day Immediate Roadside Prohibitions for refusal allegations should be untouched by the November 30th ruling. As far as we’re concerned it is the 90-day scheme that was found unconstitutional, with an immediate prohibition, vehicle impoundment, RDP and interlock, fines, etc.; without an

A hot topic this week has been whether the Government can rely on the unlawful legislative scheme if the police allege that the subject failed or refused to blow. In other words, if they don’t get a sample, can they then say that the search and seizure wasn’t unreasonable because there are no results to

Howard and the crew who argued Sivia, as well as the lawyers for the Government will appear in Court on Monday to make submissions on what should happen as a result of the finding that the IRP scheme is unconstitutional. Kyla wrote some of the draft arguments concerning the Charter issues. We were confident the

Firstly, we’d like to thank all of the people who have phoned and emailed us in the last couple of weeks. It’s been gratifying to know that so many people support the work we do, and that so many people are following our updates. It’s inspiring to see that people are aware of the threat

We have a number of clients waiting for a decision on their review hearing with the OSMV. We are also fielding many calls and emails from people who conducted their own hearing or had another law office conduct the hearing, and have yet to receive a decision from the OSMV. This is what we know:

If you’ve read some of the previous blog postings, you’ll see that we dug up a lot of material over the last 16 months concerning problems with the ASDs. We knew that it was a mistake to rely on them for harsh punishment. So we were encouraged when the Spencer decision came out a few

We expect that arguments will be made to the Court before Christmas concerning what the declaration should be, i.e. what sections of the law will be struck or modified and whether this will apply retrospectively. We expect the Government to take the position that the decision applies from this point forward. There has also been