Impaired Driving

Information relating to impaired driving.

Why Don't You Promote Being a Designated Driver?

Operation Red NoseWhy doesn't this site do more to promote the use of a designated driver? This single sentence was all that was sent to me in an e-mail from a visitor to my DriveSmartBC web site. With the Christmas season upon us, it's probably a great time to revisit the subject.

CASE LAW - Sivia v Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

BC Courts Coat of ArmsThis case is the first major challenge of BC's new Immediate Roadside Prohibition laws. Mr. Justice Sigurdson has ruled that the penalties imposed for the actions taken against a driver who blows a fail (over .08) reading on an approved screening device are contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because there is no adequate option for a review.

45 Deaths that Didn't Occur

Keys and DrinkI'm no stranger to death by automobile. It was never a pleasure to investigate fatalities and for me there was no satisfaction in the successful prosecution of the impaired driver that caused them. Many more people than the direct victims were hurt and I knew that the only way I could really contribute was to hunt down the impaired driver and stop them.

The Approved Screening Device

Much has been written recently about the Approved Screening Device being used by police to test drivers under the Immediate Roadside Prohibition program. Many are curious about how it works, and those that have been tested were quite often surprised at the result. The authority for the screening comes from section 254 of the Criminal Code.

CASE LAW - Spencer v Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

BC Courts Coat of ArmsIn this case, Kristen Debra-Lee Spencer challenges an Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP) in a Supreme Court Review of an adjudicators decision upholding the IRP on review. Ms. Spencer was issued the IRP for being in care and control of a motor vehicle, having alcohol in her body and refusing to provide a breath sample on the demand of a police officer.

CASE LAW - McNeal v Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

BC Courts Coat of ArmsGary McNeal crashed his vehicle and left the scene. Police tracked him down during their investigation, demanded breath samples and received readings above the legal limit. McNeal applied for judicial review of the adjudicator's decision that he was in fact the driver of the crashed vehicle.

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

BC Courts Coat of ArmsMr. Gilles is seeking to have the courts quash an adjudicator's decision and cancel the Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP) issued to him after being stopped by police while driving on Bainbridge Avenue in Burnaby, B.C.

VIEWPOINT - Mandatory Parking Lots for Bars

MegaphoneThoughts that make you go "hmmm..." This article by Eric de Place looks at civic government and the laws for the provision of parking at businesses. Why do they mandate parking at drinking establishments? Perhaps parking should be forbidden there, after all, we don't want people to drink and drive!

CASE LAW - Giesbrecht v Superintendent of Motor Vehicles

BC Courts Coat of ArmsThis is the first reported case that I have seen involving the new Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP) provisions of the Motor Vehicle Act.

Should Government Revise Our New Impaired Driving Program?

MegaphoneOur new impaired driving penalties appear to be getting the word out: drinking and driving is not acceptable here in B.C. If you do and are caught, it will be a long road to travel in order to restore your driving privileges. So be it, you knew that there could be consequences when you turned the key.

Syndicate content

Google Ads