Not all of the requirements you've cited apply right at the 4500 kg cut off though. For example, you don't need a name on the side of the vehicle unless you're registered for or actually weight 8182 kg or more. There are nuances to the CMV requirements that really do lend this area well to receiving...

One of the elements of the offence for using cell phone (as for any other moving or non-moving violation) is that the defending was driving a "motor vehicle" as defined in s. 1 of the Highway Traffic Act. The officer's mis-identification or imprecise identification (i.e. "grey car&quo...

As a matter of law you cannot be convicted simply for missing an early resolution meeting. Sure you can. Provincial Offences Act s. 9. It means you're deemed not to dispute the charge. For failing to attend the meeting our ticket will likely be placed into a pile to be brought into court sometime i...

R v Grech-Vennare, 2013 ONCJ 278

http://canlii.ca/en/on/oncj/doc/2013/20 ... cj278.html

In 2008 the Court of Appeal said that the presumption was of strict liability for HTA offences (Brampton v Kanda), however that is only the starting point. Many offences have been addressed in specific cases both before and after Kanda. You'd have to do your research.

Ambiguous signage might form part of a due diligence defence if the offence is one of strict liability.

Is there a way to find out who? Through disclosure maybe? Don't we have the right to challenge our accuser? We don't have a strict right to face our accuser like the do in the US based on the confrontation clause of the 6th amendment. What we have is a right, through disclosure which is mandated by...

There is an ongoing challenge to s. 68.1(1) of the Highway Traffic Act, which mandates speed limiting devices for commercial motor vehicles. It will be heard soon by the Ontario Court of Justice, sitting as an appeal court from the decision of the justice of the peace who ruled the legislation uncon...

That would make much more sense. I know x-copper is a reputable organization that's been around for a while. I would be surprised if they were acting outside of their scope of practice as paralegals.

What would be the purpose of failing to accept the disclosure? You requested it...presumably you want/need it... Wouldn't that just mean you get it later? To what end?

I feel obligated to point out that paralegals aren't allowed to represent someone on an impaired or over 80 charge. You can read here on the Law Society of Upper Canada website that their practice is restricted to offences for which the maximum penalty is 6 months in jail (a regular summary convicti...

Not just CAN withdraw a charge, but MUST if there is no reasonable prospect of conviction - per the Crown Policy Manual. To pursue a conviction where there is no reasonable prospect of conviction (because the facts don't support it) would be unethical. That being said, it may well be that the prosec...

You should be clear about whether your case is being "reopened" or "appealed". Reopenings are governed by s. 11 of the POA. They are available only within 15 days of the conviction. Outside that time frame you would normally be talking about a full appeal, which is governed by Pa...

If you are considering filling an 11(b) motion you need to divide up all the time periods (between each appearance or event) and think about whether they are attributable to normal intake, crown delay, institutional delay, or defence delay. It's only where the crown and institutional delay is unacce...

Option 2 is Plea of Guilty- Submissions to Penalty. From what I understand, it means that the payable fine can be decreased from $220. However, would this mean that my demerit points/insurance would be still the same as if I chose option 1? My main concern is to not get destroyed by my insurance co...