CASE LAW - Sivia v British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles)

BC Courts Coat of Arms The reasons for judgment of Mr. Justice Sigurdson (in chambers) continues from the case where he found that British Columbia's Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP) where a driver provided a fail breath sample was contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because it did not provide for sufficient grounds for review of a prohibition. In this case, Mr. Justice Sigurdson decides that penalties issued under the old IRP scheme will stand as his declaration of invalidity is not retroactive.

Links:

Sivia v Superintendent of Motor Vehicles (original case)

Reasons for Judgment - Sivia v British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles)

Log in to post comments

Visitor Survey

DriveSmartBC displays a small number of advertisements to help cover the cost of operating the site. I would like to know what you think of the current advertising.

How do you find the advertising on DriveSmartBC?

I don’t really notice it.

It is reasonable and does not interfere with my reading.

I would prefer somewhat less advertising.

I find the advertising distracting.

I find the advertising intrusive.

Do you have any comments about the advertising?

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.