OHTA.ca

Can someone shed some light on the following definition of a Driver ?

This is from a law dictionary and is a little confusing. It talks about commercial transportation and being employed as a driver. They seem to have missed out the part where someone who isn't employed as a driver is a driver. Does that mean we are not actually drivers according to Law ?

Can someone please help me understand this...thank you

DRIVER. One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other

vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals.

2. Frequent accidents occur in consequence of the neglect or want of

skill of drivers of public stage coaches, for which the employers are

responsible.

3. The law requires that a driver should possess reasonable skill and

be of good habits for the journey; if, therefore, he is not acquainted with

the road he undertakes to drive; 3 Bingh. Rep. 314, 321; drives with reins

so loose that he cannot govern his horses; 2 Esp. R. 533; does not give

notice of any serious danger on the road; 1 Camp. R. 67; takes the wrong

side of the road; 4 Esp. R. 273; incautiously comes in collision with

another carriage; 1 Stark. R. 423; 1 Campb. R. 167; or does not exercise a

sound and reasonable discretion in travelling on the road, to avoid dangers

and difficulties, and any accident happens by which any passenger is

injured, both the driver and his employers will be responsible. 2 Stark. R.

37; 3 Engl. C. L. Rep. 233; 2 Esp. R. 533; 11. Mass. 57; 6 T. R. 659; 1

East, R. 106; 4 B. & A. 590; 6 Eng. C. L. R. 528; 2 Mc Lean, R. 157. Vide

Common carriers Negligence; Quasi Offence.

I looked up Blacks Law definition too and it says something very similar...

"Driver" "One employed in conducting or operating a coach, carriage, wagon or other vehicle, with horses, mules, or other animals, or a bicycle, tricycle, or motor car, though not a street railroad car." So a driver is someone who makes their living driving on roads, such as a chauffeur, taxicab driver, or trucker.

To regulate commerce on the roads.

Can someone explain this as I think I am missing something here?

That's one definition...

The Highway Traffic Act of Ontario defines driver as - "driver" means a person who drives a vehicle on a highway.

So that's the definition.

Each statute may set out it's own definitions, so don't get too hung up over what another book may say, when it comes to the HTA, it's the HTA's definition that matters.

The definition FyreStorm refers to can be found in section 1.1 of the HTA. Also for clarity, the same section says:

"highway" includes a common and public highway, street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct or trestle, any part of which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles and includes the area between the lateral property lines thereof; ("voie publique")

Thank you for your replies.. I looked up the definition of 'vehicle' in the law dictionaries and founf this...so I am still somewhat confused.

"vehicle" means a device in, on or by which a person or

thing may be transported or drawn on a highway.

Then I checked on the word 'transport' and found that it means :

Transport,,, Blacks Law first Edition.

"The removal of goods or persons from one place to another by carrier"

Carrier:

CARRIERS, contracts. There are two kinds of carriers, namely, common carriers, (q. v.) who have been considered under another head; and private carriers. These latter are persons who, although they do not undertake to transport the goods of such as choose to employ them, yet agree to carry the goods of some particular person for hire, from one place to another.

It's a ll a little baffling isn't it?

Anyone have any idea why the Law dictionary doesn't cover the issue of a 'driver' being outside of commercial hire or business ?

I think your first problem is that Blacks is an American Law Dictionary.

But more importantly, you need to look at the relevant Act. Each Act defines the scope and meaning of the terms its using, and its normally found in the first section of the Act.

The following are the meaning that appear to be of interest to you from The Ontario Highway Traffic Act:

Interpretation, general

Definitions

1. (1) In this Act,

"driver" means a person who drives a vehicle on a highway; ("conducteur")

"highway" includes a common and public highway, street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct or trestle, any part of which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles and includes the area between the lateral property lines thereof; ("voie publique")

"motor vehicle" includes an automobile, a motorcycle, a motor-assisted bicycle unless otherwise indicated in this Act, and any other vehicle propelled or driven otherwise than by muscular power, but does not include a street car or other motor vehicle running only upon rails, a power-assisted bicycle, a motorized snow vehicle, a traction engine, a farm tractor, a self-propelled implement of husbandry or a road-building machine; ("vehicule automobile")

Of course each act can use a different meaning for a term. Thus the classification of something can be different between different acts.

Likewise an Act can define any term to mean anything it wishes, it does not need to have exactly the same meaning as it does in the Queens English. If the legislator wanted to it could define the term "Organ Donor" as the driver of a motorcycle, and use "Organ Donor" exclusively (outside of the definition section) in an Act about the regulation of motorcycles.

Yes!!

CoolChick would take a very strict view or organ donor, prohitibiting me from giving my keyboard tot he local church.

Sorry CC, I'm JK (mostly).

Any law or act will have (as frozen over stated) it's own definitions...Black's Law Dictionary shouldn't even be referenced here and I think that's part of the problem...a lack of understanding.

Canada (the corporation if you wish) established laws and regulations for those who wish to live here.

If you wish to not follow those laws, go some place where those laws don't apply.

Go establish your own country somewhere. Maybe in the foothills of Afghanistan, I'm sure they'll respect your 'common law'...

Frozenover wrote:I think your first problem is that Blacks is an American Law Dictionary.

Actually the courtsof Canada and America are based on British Law and Blacks law applies to Canada...as does the Bouvier Law dictionary.

But more importantly, you need to look at the relevant Act. Each Act defines the scope and meaning of the terms its using, and its normally found in the first section of the Act.

Yes I have read the Acts from beginning to end... very time consuming and VERY enlightening. Even the Financial Administration Act which is extremely long but a gem of intrigue

The following are the meaning that appear to be of interest to you from The Ontario Highway Traffic Act:

Interpretation, general

Definitions

1. (1) In this Act,

"driver" means a person who drives a vehicle on a highway; ("conducteur")

"highway" includes a common and public highway, street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct or trestle, any part of which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles and includes the area between the lateral property lines thereof; ("voie publique")

"motor vehicle" includes an automobile, a motorcycle, a motor-assisted bicycle unless otherwise indicated in this Act, and any other vehicle propelled or driven otherwise than by muscular power, but does not include a street car or other motor vehicle running only upon rails, a power-assisted bicycle, a motorized snow vehicle, a traction engine, a farm tractor, a self-propelled implement of husbandry or a road-building machine; ("vehicule automobile")

You missed out the definition of the term VEHICLE..which is of great importance in this and any other Act containing this word. Then add the word MOTOR .... it comes as no surprise to me that the the word MOTOR has been attached to the definition of vehicle to obscure the fact that a vehicle is a vessel of commerce. If yoou read the Acts thoroughly this is commonplace throughout....its called smoke and mirrors...

Look up... in law dictionary the following words...

person

public

vehicle

Of course each act can use a different meaning for a term. Thus the classification of something can be different between different acts.

Think about what you are saying here... you are saying that the Acts can be worded to mean anything regardless of anything... thats pretty warped stuff...
Likewise an Act can define any term to mean anything it wishes, it does not need to have exactly the same meaning as it does in the Queens English. If the legislator wanted to it could define the term "Organ Donor" as the driver of a motorcycle, and use "Organ Donor" exclusively (outside of the definition section) in an Act about the regulation of motorcycles.

No an Act cannot define anything to mean whatever IT wishes. Definitions are given in the language of legalese and you are right, not neccessarily in line with the Queens English. Therefore... a driver according to the definition contained within the realms of legalese means someone who operates in commerce. Simple as that... I asked for someone to clarify the part that is obviously missing... and that is the part that shows a driver to be someone in their private capacity as a traveller as per the Bill of Rights.... I am still waiting for an answer to that... thank you for trying..I appreciate it.

CoolChick, like I said you seem to have your convictions about this stuff, but your thought process isn't particularly mainstream and while I'M CERTAIN you'd just tell me the mainstream is composed of a bunch of unthinking, brainwashed cow types...we the mainstream are happy with the system.

Majority rules.

Not about to change...

Highway Traffic Act definition of "vehicle":

"vehicle" includes a motor vehicle, trailer, traction engine, farm tractor, road-building machine, bicycle and any vehicle drawn, propelled or driven by any kind of power, including muscular power, but does not include a motorized snow vehicle or a street car

Go look it up.

A person driving a motor vehicle is engaging in a licenced activity. No one has a right to drive. Other people have tried this, suggested they had a right to drive, and ended up in jail.

CoolChick wrote:

You missed out the definition of the term VEHICLE..which is of great importance in this and any other Act containing this word. Then add the word MOTOR .... it comes as no surprise to me that the the word MOTOR has been attached to the definition of vehicle to obscure the fact that a vehicle is a vessel of commerce. If yoou read the Acts thoroughly this is commonplace throughout....its called smoke and mirrors...

Vehicle from the HTA:

"vehicle" includes a motor vehicle, trailer, traction engine, farm tractor, road-building machine, bicycle and any vehicle drawn, propelled or driven by any kind of power, including muscular power, but does not include a motorized snow vehicle or a street car; ("vehicule")

CoolChick wrote:

Look up... in law dictionary the following words...

person

public

vehicle

From the Duhaime Legal Dictionary

Person

An entity recognized by the law as separate and independent, with legal rights and existence including the ability to sue and be sued, to sign contracts, to receive gifts, to appear in court either by themselves or by lawyer and, generally, other powers incidental to the full expression of the entity in law.

Public

public 1) n. the people of the nation, state, county, district or municipality, which the government serves. 2) adj. referring to any agency, interest, property, or activity which is under the authority of the government or which belongs to the people. This distinguishes public from private interests as with public and private schools, public and private utilities, public and private hospitals, public and private lands, and public and private roads. (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/public)

Vehicle

Any thing that is designed to transport persons or objects.

Nothing shocking here.

CoolChick wrote:Think about what you are saying here... you are saying that the Acts can be worded to mean anything regardless of anything... thats pretty warped stuff...

It is what it is.

The legislator can write an act anyway it wishes as long as it doesn't violate the constitution. Check out this link here http://www.slate.com/id/2194605/ where South Dakota writes the definition of "Human Being" to meet it's goals.

The real question here should be, what is a person?

A person includes munincipality and the crown.

You can't be a fictional entity and that's what a person is. A legal fiction, a corporation.

The crown owns all registered persons. If you believe you are a person than you believe you need to follow corporate regulations set out for corporate identities.

Acts, regulations, statutes do not apply to mankind, only to regulated corporate crown registered legal persons/fictions.

Stop pretending you could ever be something you are not.

A driver is a person, not a man or woman.

MR. LEGAL FICTION

is not a man.

A PERSON is a CORPORATION. Not a man.

A DRIVER is not a man.

Show us where the CORPORATION OF ONTARIO has jurisdiction over men and women?

All I see is LEGAL FICTIONAL PERSONS.

But a man or a woman is a Person ...therefore your logic is very flawed is it not?