Impaired Driving/Over 80
Every case is different, but the ramifications of a conviction are always dramatic and the cost of hiring proper representation is generally minor when compared to the costs that you might be facing…
“A big thanks for helping me… It was very reassuring to have the support of a firm that knows how to navigate the system.”*
Jane L, Toronto
- This is a very unique area of law;
- A legal opinion on a criminal driving charge requires the considered advice of a professional Lawyer, there are no exceptions.
- We offer free consultations, so that you will have absolutely nothing to lose by talking to us.
- After hearing your version and reviewing all of the disclosure, we will do our very best to lay out your options and the likelihood of success at trial.
- Whether you think that you are guilty or innocent, it is absolutely critical that you talk to a Lawyer before making a decision, or entering a plea.
- You will not be penalized for having Counsel with you in Court and you will not get credit for taking responsibility quickly without the assistance of a Lawyer.
- We will provide you with a quote for a fixed fee so you will know exactly what representation will cost; with no surprises.
Good people, make mistakes. In fact, most people charged with Impaired Driving are otherwise law abiding, honest people who unexpectedly find themselves in unfamiliar surroundings, facing a very difficult charge.
“If there is a way to eliminate or reduce your charge, we will find it!”
You should not assume that you are guilty just because you have been charged and you should not feel that you are morally obligated to plead guilty at the first opportunity in order to take responsibility for your actions. This is definitely one of the most serious decisions that you will ever have to make in your lifetime and you absolutely do need to speak to a Lawyer before deciding what to do.
We are certainly not advocating drinking and driving, but the reality is that it is actually legal to drink and drive in the Province of Ontario. The problem is that at some point legal behaviour can cross over a threshold into illegal behaviour and unfortunately there is no practical way of knowing with precision exactly when one has crossed that line. In addition, judgement becomes impaired as alcohol is consumed and the result, all too often, is that otherwise law abiding citizens find themselves in trouble with the law and facing an Impaired Driving or Over 80 charge.
The penalties for drinking and driving are severe and result in mandatory fines and automatic license suspensions. While custody would be extremely unusual for a first time offender, absent exceptional circumstances, jail time is automatic for subsequent offences. One’s ability to cross borders or to hold a job can be permanently compromised. Insurance rate increases can amount to tens of thousands of dollars.
This is not the time to choose your legal representation based on the lowest bidder; you need the best defence possible and the professional assistance of a Trial Lawyer that defends Impaired Driving charges for a living.
Whether you think that you’re guilty or innocent, we would like to invite you to visit our office to meet with us in person; but please call first, since meetings are by appointment only. Our Lawyers deal exclusively with Driving Offences and we will do our very best to determine whether your charge can be eliminated or reduced. The initial consultation is always free, so you have absolutely nothing to lose.
You will find us to be very understanding and professional. We are not here to judge you; we are here to help you. When everything seems to be unravelling, you absolutely do need a professional in your corner and one that has your best interests at heart. So, give us a call and ask to schedule your free half hour consultation, not with a paralegal, but with a real experienced Trial Lawyer.
We will do everything possible to assist you.
*Past results are not necessarily indicative of future outcomes which will vary according to the facts of each case.
Motor Vehicles, Vessels and Aircraft
Dangerous operation of motor vehicles, vessels and aircraft
(2) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1)
Dangerous operation causing bodily harm
(3) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1) and thereby causes bodily harm to any other person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.
Dangerous operation causing death
(4) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1) and thereby causes the death of any other person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 249; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36, c. 32 (4th Supp.), s. 57; 1994, c. 44, s. 11.
(2) Every one who commits an offence under subsection (1)
Flight causing bodily harm or death
(3) Every one commits an offence who causes bodily harm to or the death of another person by operating a motor vehicle in a manner described in paragraph 249(1)(a), if the person operating the motor vehicle was being pursued by a peace officer operating a motor vehicle and failed, without reasonable excuse and in order to evade the police officer, to stop the vehicle as soon as is reasonable in the circumstances.
(4) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (3)
2000, c. 2, s. 1.
Causing death by criminal negligence (street racing)
2006, c. 14, s. 2.
Causing bodily harm by criminal negligence (street racing)
2006, c. 14, s. 2.
Dangerous operation of motor vehicle while street racing
(2) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection (1)
Dangerous operation causing bodily harm
(3) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection (1) and thereby causes bodily harm to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.
Dangerous operation causing death
(4) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection (1) and thereby causes the death of another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.
2006, c. 14, s. 2.
Failure to keep watch on person towed
(2) Every one who operates a vessel while towing a person on any water skis, surf-board, water sled or other object during the period from one hour after sunset to sunrise is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 250; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36.
Unseaworthy vessel and unsafe aircraft
(i) on a voyage from a place in Canada to any other place in or out of Canada, or
(ii) on a voyage from a place on the inland waters of the United States to a place in Canada,
(2) An accused shall not be convicted of an offence under this section where the accused establishes that,
(i) the accused used all reasonable means to ensure that the vessel was seaworthy, or
(ii) to send or take the vessel while it was unseaworthy was, under the circumstances, reasonable and justifiable;
(i) the accused used all reasonable means to ensure that the aircraft was fit and safe for flight, or
(ii) to send or operate the aircraft while it was not fit and safe for flight was, under the circumstances, reasonable and justifiable; and
(i) the accused used all reasonable means to ensure that the railway equipment was fit and safe for operation, or
(ii) to send the railway equipment for operation or to operate it while it was not fit and safe for operation was, under the circumstances, reasonable and justifiable.
(3) No proceedings shall be instituted under this section in respect of a vessel or aircraft, or in respect of railway equipment sent for operation or operated on a line of railway that is within the legislative authority of Parliament, without the consent in writing of the Attorney General of Canada.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 251; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36, c. 32 (4th Supp.), s. 58.
Failure to stop at scene of accident
(1.1) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1) in a case not referred to in subsection (1.2) or (1.3) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
(1.2) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1) knowing that bodily harm has been caused to another person involved in the accident is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.
Offence involving bodily harm or death
(1.3) Every person who commits an offence under subsection (1) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life if
(2) In proceedings under subsection (1), evidence that an accused failed to stop his vehicle, vessel or, where possible, his aircraft, as the case may be, offer assistance where any person has been injured or appears to require assistance and give his name and address is, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, proof of an intent to escape civil or criminal liability.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 252; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36; 1994, c. 44, s. 12; 1999, c. 32, s. 1(Preamble).
(2) For greater certainty, the reference to impairment by alcohol or a drug in paragraph (1)(a) includes impairment by a combination of alcohol and a drug.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 253; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36, c. 32 (4th Supp.), s. 59; 2008, c. 6, s. 18.
analyste
analyst means a person designated by the Attorney General as an analyst for the purposes of section 258;
contenant approuv
approved container means
alcootest approuv
approved instrument means an instrument of a kind that is designed to receive and make an analysis of a sample of the breath of a person in order to measure the concentration of alcohol in the blood of that person and is approved as suitable for the purposes of section 258 by order of the Attorney General of Canada;
appareil de dtection approuv
approved screening device means a device of a kind that is designed to ascertain the presence of alcohol in the blood of a person and that is approved for the purposes of this section by order of the Attorney General of Canada;
agent valuateur
evaluating officer means a peace officer who is qualified under the regulations to conduct evaluations under subsection (3.1);
mdecin qualifi
qualified medical practitioner means a person duly qualified by provincial law to practise medicine;
technicien qualifi
qualified technician means,
Testing for presence of alcohol or a drug
(2) If a peace officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that a person has alcohol or a drug in their body and that the person has, within the preceding three hours, operated a motor vehicle or vessel, operated or assisted in the operation of an aircraft or railway equipment or had the care or control of a motor vehicle, a vessel, an aircraft or railway equipment, whether it was in motion or not, the peace officer may, by demand, require the person to comply with paragraph (a), in the case of a drug, or with either or both of paragraphs (a) and (b), in the case of alcohol:
(2.1) For greater certainty, a peace officer may make a video recording of a performance of the physical coordination tests referred to in paragraph (2)(a).
(3) If a peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that a person is committing, or at any time within the preceding three hours has committed, an offence under section 253 as a result of the consumption of alcohol, the peace officer may, by demand made as soon as practicable, require the person
(i) samples of breath that, in a qualified technician’s opinion, will enable a proper analysis to be made to determine the concentration, if any, of alcohol in the person’s blood, or
(ii) if the peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that, because of their physical condition, the person may be incapable of providing a sample of breath or it would be impracticable to obtain a sample of breath, samples of blood that, in the opinion of the qualified medical practitioner or qualified technician taking the samples, will enable a proper analysis to be made to determine the concentration, if any, of alcohol in the person’s blood; and
(3.1) If a peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that a person is committing, or at any time within the preceding three hours has committed, an offence under paragraph 253(1)(a) as a result of the consumption of a drug or of a combination of alcohol and a drug, the peace officer may, by demand made as soon as practicable, require the person to submit, as soon as practicable, to an evaluation conducted by an evaluating officer to determine whether the person’s ability to operate a motor vehicle, a vessel, an aircraft or railway equipment is impaired by a drug or by a combination of alcohol and a drug, and to accompany the peace officer for that purpose.
(3.2) For greater certainty, a peace officer may make a video recording of an evaluation referred to in subsection (3.1).
Testing for presence of alcohol
(3.3) If the evaluating officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that the person has alcohol in their body and if a demand was not made under paragraph (2)(b) or subsection (3), the evaluating officer may, by demand made as soon as practicable, require the person to provide, as soon as practicable, a sample of breath that, in the evaluating officer’s opinion, will enable a proper analysis to be made by means of an approved instrument.
(3.4) If, on completion of the evaluation, the evaluating officer has reasonable grounds to believe, based on the evaluation, that the person’s ability to operate a motor vehicle, a vessel, an aircraft or railway equipment is impaired by a drug or by a combination of alcohol and a drug, the evaluating officer may, by demand made as soon as practicable, require the person to provide, as soon as practicable,
(4) Samples of blood may be taken from a person under subsection (3) or (3.4) only by or under the direction of a qualified medical practitioner who is satisfied that taking the samples would not endanger the person’s life or health.
Failure or refusal to comply with demand
(5) Everyone commits an offence who, without reasonable excuse, fails or refuses to comply with a demand made under this section.
Only one determination of guilt
(6) A person who is convicted of an offence under subsection (5) for a failure or refusal to comply with a demand may not be convicted of another offence under that subsection in respect of the same transaction.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 254; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36, c. 1 (4th Supp.), ss. 14, 18(F), c. 32 (4th Supp.), s. 60; 1999, c. 32, s. 2(Preamble); 2008, c. 6, s. 19.
(2) A regulation may incorporate any material by reference either as it exists on a specified date or as amended from time to time.
Incorporated material is not a regulation
(3) For greater certainty, material does not become a regulation for the purposes of the Statutory Instruments Act because it is incorporated by reference.
2008, c. 6, s. 20.
(i) for a first offence, to a fine of not less than $1,000,
(ii) for a second offence, to imprisonment for not less than 30 days, and
(iii) for each subsequent offence, to imprisonment for not less than 120 days;
Impaired driving causing bodily harm
(2) Everyone who commits an offence under paragraph 253(1)(a) and causes bodily harm to another person as a result is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years.
Blood alcohol level over legal limit bodily harm
(2.1) Everyone who, while committing an offence under paragraph 253(1)(b), causes an accident resulting in bodily harm to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years.
Failure or refusal to provide sample bodily harm
(2.2) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection 254(5) and, at the time of committing the offence, knows or ought to know that their operation of the motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment, their assistance in the operation of the aircraft or railway equipment or their care or control of the motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment caused an accident resulting in bodily harm to another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years.
Impaired driving causing death
(3) Everyone who commits an offence under paragraph 253(1)(a) and causes the death of another person as a result is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.
Blood alcohol level over legal limit death
(3.1) Everyone who, while committing an offence under paragraph 253(1)(b), causes an accident resulting in the death of another person is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.
Failure or refusal to provide sample death
(3.2) Everyone who commits an offence under subsection 254(5) and, at the time of committing the offence, knows or ought to know that their operation of the motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment, their assistance in the operation of the aircraft or railway equipment or their care or control of the motor vehicle, vessel, aircraft or railway equipment caused an accident resulting in the death of another person, or in bodily harm to another person whose death ensues, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.
(3.3) For greater certainty, everyone who is liable to the punishment described in any of subsections (2) to (3.2) is also liable to the minimum punishment described in paragraph (1)(a).
(4) A person who is convicted of an offence committed under section 253 or subsection 254(5) is, for the purposes of this Act, deemed to be convicted for a second or subsequent offence, as the case may be, if they have previously been convicted of
*(5) Notwithstanding subsection 730(1), a court may, instead of convicting a person of an offence committed under section 253, after hearing medical or other evidence, if it considers that the person is in need of curative treatment in relation to his consumption of alcohol or drugs and that it would not be contrary to the public interest, by order direct that the person be discharged under section 730 on the conditions prescribed in a probation order, including a condition respecting the person’s attendance for curative treatment in relation to that consumption of alcohol or drugs.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 255; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36; R.S., 1985, c. 1 (4th Supp.), s. 18(F); 1995, c. 22, s. 18; 1999, c. 32, s. 3(Preamble); 2000, c. 25, s. 2; 2008, c. 6, s. 21, c. 18, ss. 7, 45.2.
Aggravating circumstances for sentencing purposes
1999, c. 32, s. 4(Preamble).
Warrants to obtain blood samples
(i) by reason of any physical or mental condition of the person that resulted from the consumption of alcohol or a drug, the accident or any other occurrence related to or resulting from the accident, the person is unable to consent to the taking of samples of his or her blood, and
(ii) the taking of samples of blood from the person would not endanger the life or health of the person,
(2) A warrant issued pursuant to subsection (1) may be in Form 5 or 5.1 varied to suit the case.
(3) Notwithstanding paragraphs 487.1(4)(b) and (c), an information on oath submitted by telephone or other means of telecommunication for the purposes of this section shall include, instead of the statements referred to in those paragraphs, a statement setting out the offence alleged to have been committed and identifying the person from whom blood samples are to be taken.
(4) Samples of blood may be taken from a person pursuant to a warrant issued pursuant to subsection (1) only during such time as a qualified medical practitioner is satisfied that the conditions referred to in subparagraphs (1)(b)(i) and (ii) continue to exist in respect of that person.
(5) When a warrant issued under subsection (1) is executed, the peace officer shall, as soon as practicable, give a copy of it or, in the case of a warrant issued by telephone or other means of telecommunication, a facsimile to the person from whom the blood samples are taken.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 256; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36; 1992, c. 1, s. 58; 1994, c. 44, s. 13; 2000, c. 25, s. 3; 2008, c. 6, s. 22.
No criminal or civil liability
(2) No qualified medical practitioner by whom or under whose direction a sample of blood is taken from a person under subsection 254(3) or (3.4) or section 256, and no qualified technician acting under the direction of a qualified medical practitioner, incurs any criminal or civil liability for anything necessarily done with reasonable care and skill when taking the sample.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 257; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36; 2008, c. 6, s. 23.
(i) [Not in force]
(ii) each sample was taken as soon as practicable after the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed and, in the case of the first sample, not later than two hours after that time, with an interval of at least fifteen minutes between the times when the samples were taken,
(iii) each sample was received from the accused directly into an approved container or into an approved instrument operated by a qualified technician, and
(iv) an analysis of each sample was made by means of an approved instrument operated by a qualified technician,
evidence of the results of the analyses so made is conclusive proof that the concentration of alcohol in the accused’s blood both at the time when the analyses were made and at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed was, if the results of the analyses are the same, the concentration determined by the analyses and, if the results of the analyses are different, the lowest of the concentrations determined by the analyses, in the absence of evidence tending to show all of the following three things that the approved instrument was malfunctioning or was operated improperly, that the malfunction or improper operation resulted in the determination that the concentration of alcohol in the accused’s blood exceeded 80 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood, and that the concentration of alcohol in the accused’s blood would not in fact have exceeded 80 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed;
(i) at the time the sample was taken, the person taking the sample took an additional sample of the blood of the accused and one of the samples was retained to permit an analysis of it to be made by or on behalf of the accused and, in the case where the accused makes a request within six months from the taking of the samples, one of the samples was ordered to be released under subsection (4),
(ii) both samples referred to in subparagraph (i) were taken as soon as practicable and in any event not later than two hours after the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed,
(iii) both samples referred to in subparagraph (i) were taken by a qualified medical practitioner or a qualified technician under the direction of a qualified medical practitioner,
(iv) both samples referred to in subparagraph (i) were received from the accused directly into, or placed directly into, approved containers that were subsequently sealed, and
(v) an analysis was made by an analyst of at least one of the samples,
evidence of the result of the analysis is conclusive proof that the concentration of alcohol in the accused’s blood both at the time when the samples were taken and at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed was the concentration determined by the analysis or, if more than one sample was analyzed and the results of the analyses are the same, the concentration determined by the analyses and, if the results of the analyses are different, the lowest of the concentrations determined by the analyses, in the absence of evidence tending to show all of the following three things that the analysis was performed improperly, that the improper performance resulted in the determination that the concentration of alcohol in the accused’s blood exceeded 80 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood, and that the concentration of alcohol in the accused’s blood would not in fact have exceeded 80 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed;
(i) the amount of alcohol that the accused consumed,
(ii) the rate at which the alcohol that the accused consumed would have been absorbed and eliminated by the accused’s body, or
(iii) a calculation based on that evidence of what the concentration of alcohol in the accused’s blood would have been at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed;
(i) a concentration of alcohol in the accused’s blood that did not exceed 80 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood at the time when the offence was alleged to have been committed, and
(ii) the concentration of alcohol in the accused’s blood as determined under paragraph (c) or (d), as the case may be, at the time when the sample or samples were taken;
(i) that the analysis of each of the samples has been made by means of an approved instrument operated by the technician and ascertained by the technician to be in proper working order by means of an alcohol standard, identified in the certificate, that is suitable for use with an approved instrument,
(ii) the results of the analyses so made, and
(iii) if the samples were taken by the technician,
(A) [Not in force]
(B) the time when and place where each sample and any specimen described in clause (A) was taken, and
(C) that each sample was received from the accused directly into an approved container or into an approved instrument operated by the technician,
is evidence of the facts alleged in the certificate without proof of the signature or the official character of the person appearing to have signed the certificate;
(i) a certificate of a qualified medical practitioner stating that
(A) they took the sample and before the sample was taken they were of the opinion that taking it would not endanger the accused’s life or health and, in the case of a demand made under section 256, that by reason of any physical or mental condition of the accused that resulted from the consumption of alcohol or a drug, the accident or any other occurrence related to or resulting from the accident, the accused was unable to consent to the taking of the sample,
(B) at the time the sample was taken, an additional sample of the blood of the accused was taken to permit analysis of one of the samples to be made by or on behalf of the accused,
(C) the time when and place where both samples referred to in clause (B) were taken, and
(D) both samples referred to in clause (B) were received from the accused directly into, or placed directly into, approved containers that were subsequently sealed and that are identified in the certificate,
(ii) a certificate of a qualified medical practitioner stating that the medical practitioner caused the sample to be taken by a qualified technician under his direction and that before the sample was taken the qualified medical practitioner was of the opinion referred to in clause (i)(A), or
(iii) a certificate of a qualified technician stating that the technician took the sample and the facts referred to in clauses (i)(B) to (D)
is evidence of the facts alleged in the certificate without proof of the signature or official character of the person appearing to have signed the certificate; and
Evidence of failure to give sample
(2) Unless a person is required to give a sample of a bodily substance under paragraph 254(2)(b) or subsection 254(3), (3.3) or (3.4), evidence that they failed or refused to give a sample for analysis for the purposes of this section or that a sample was not taken is not admissible and the failure, refusal or fact that a sample was not taken shall not be the subject of comment by any person in the proceedings.
Evidence of failure to comply with demand
(3) In any proceedings under subsection 255(1) in respect of an offence committed under paragraph 253(1)(a) or in any proceedings under subsection 255(2) or (3), evidence that the accused, without reasonable excuse, failed or refused to comply with a demand made under section 254 is admissible and the court may draw an inference adverse to the accused from that evidence.
Release of sample for analysis
(4) If, at the time a sample of an accused’s blood is taken, an additional sample is taken and retained, a judge of a superior court of criminal jurisdiction or a court of criminal jurisdiction shall, on the summary application of the accused made within six months after the day on which the samples were taken, order the release of one of the samples for the purpose of examination or analysis, subject to any terms that appear to be necessary or desirable to ensure that the sample is safeguarded and preserved for use in any proceedings in respect of which it was taken.
Testing of blood for concentration of a drug
(5) A sample of an accused’s blood taken under subsection 254(3) or section 256 or with the accused’s consent for the purpose of analysis to determine the concentration, if any, of alcohol in the blood may be tested to determine the concentration, if any, of a drug in the blood.
Attendance and right to cross-examine
(6) A party against whom a certificate described in paragraph (1)(e), (f), (f.1), (g), (h) or (i) is produced may, with leave of the court, require the attendance of the qualified medical practitioner, analyst or qualified technician, as the case may be, for the purposes of cross-examination.
Notice of intention to produce certificate
(7) No certificate shall be received in evidence pursuant to paragraph (1)(e), (f), (g), (h) or (i) unless the party intending to produce it has, before the trial, given to the other party reasonable notice of his intention and a copy of the certificate.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 258; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36, c. 32 (4th Supp.), s. 61; 1992, c. 1, s. 60(F); 1994, c. 44, s. 14(E); 1997, c. 18, s. 10; 2008, c. 6, s. 24.
Unauthorized use of bodily substance
Unauthorized use or disclosure of results
(2) Subject to subsections (3) and (4), no person shall use, disclose or allow the disclosure of the results of physical coordination tests under paragraph 254(2)(a), the results of an evaluation under subsection 254(3.1), the results of the analysis of a bodily substance taken under paragraph 254(2)(b), subsection 254(3), (3.3) or (3.4) or section 256 or with the consent of the person from whom it was taken after a request by a peace officer, or the results of the analysis of medical samples that are provided by consent and subsequently seized under a warrant, except
(3) Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to persons who for medical purposes use samples or use or disclose the results of tests, taken for medical purposes, that are subsequently seized under a warrant.
(4) The results of physical coordination tests, an evaluation or an analysis referred to in subsection (2) may be disclosed to the person to whom they relate, and may be disclosed to any other person if the results are made anonymous and the disclosure is made for statistical or other research purposes.
(5) Every person who contravenes subsection (1) or (2) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
2008, c. 6, s. 25.
Mandatory order of prohibition
Alcohol ignition interlock device program
(1.1) If the offender is registered in an alcohol ignition interlock device program established under the law of the province in which the offender resides and complies with the conditions of the program, the offender may, subject to subsection (1.2), operate a motor vehicle equipped with an alcohol ignition interlock device during the prohibition period, unless the court orders otherwise.
Minimum absolute prohibition period
(1.2) An offender who is registered in a program referred to in subsection (1.1) may not operate a motor vehicle equipped with an alcohol ignition interlock device until
(i) for a first offence, 3 months after the day on which sentence is imposed,
(ii) for a second offence, 6 months after the day on which sentence is imposed, and
(iii) for each subsequent offence, 12 months after the day on which sentence is imposed; or
(1.3) and (1.4) [Repealed, 2008, c. 18, s. 8]
Discretionary order of prohibition
(2) If an offender is convicted or discharged under section 730 of an offence under section 220, 221, 236, 249, 249.1, 250, 251 or 252 or any of subsections 255(2) to (3.2) committed by means of a motor vehicle, a vessel, an aircraft or railway equipment, the court that sentences the offender may, in addition to any other punishment that may be imposed for that offence, make an order prohibiting the offender from operating a motor vehicle on any street, road, highway or other public place, or from operating a vessel, an aircraft or railway equipment, as the case may be,
Consecutive prohibition periods
(2.1) The court may, when it makes an order under this section prohibiting the operation of a motor vehicle, a vessel, an aircraft or railway equipment, as the case may be, order that the time served under that order be served consecutively to the time served under any other order made under this section that prohibits the operation of the same means of transport and that is in force.
(3) No order made under subsection (1) or (2) shall operate to prevent any person from acting as master, mate or engineer of a vessel that is required to carry officers holding certificates as master, mate or engineer.
Mandatory order of prohibition street racing
(3.1) When an offender is convicted or discharged under section 730 of an offence committed under subsection 249.4(1), the court that sentences the offender shall, in addition to any other punishment that may be imposed for that offence, make an order prohibiting the offender from operating a motor vehicle on any street, road, highway or other public place
Mandatory order of prohibition bodily harm
(3.2) When an offender is convicted or discharged under section 730 of an offence committed under section 249.3 or subsection 249.4(3), the court that sentences the offender shall, in addition to any other punishment that may be imposed for that offence, make an order prohibiting the offender from operating a motor vehicle on any street, road, highway or other public place
Mandatory order of prohibition death
(3.3) When an offender is convicted or discharged under section 730 of a first offence committed under section 249.2 or subsection 249.4(4), the court that sentences the offender shall, in addition to any other punishment that may be imposed for that offence, make an order prohibiting the offender from operating a motor vehicle on any street, road, highway or other public place
(3.4) When an offender is convicted or discharged under section 730 of an offence committed under section 249.2 or 249.3 or subsection 249.4(3) or (4), the offender has previously been convicted or discharged under section 730 of one of those offences and at least one of the convictions or discharges is under section 249.2 or subsection 249.4(4), the court that sentences the offender shall make an order prohibiting the offender from operating a motor vehicle on any street, road, highway or other public place for life.
(4) Every offender who operates a motor vehicle, vessel or aircraft or any railway equipment in Canada while disqualified from doing so, other than an offender who is registered in an alcohol ignition interlock device program established under the law of the province in which the offender resides and who complies with the conditions of the program,
Definition of disqualification
(5) For the purposes of this section, disqualification means
(i) in the case of a motor vehicle, under the law of a province, or
(ii) in the case of a vessel or an aircraft, under an Act of Parliament,
in respect of a conviction or discharge under section 730 of any offence referred to in any of subsections (1), (2) and (3.1) to (3.4).
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 259; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36, c. 1 (4th Supp.), s. 18(F), c. 32 (4th Supp.), s. 62; 1995, c. 22, ss. 10, 18; 1997, c. 18, s. 11; 1999, c. 32, s. 5(Preamble); 2000, c. 2, s. 2; 2001, c. 37, s. 1; 2006, c. 14, s. 3; 2008, c. 6, s. 26, c. 18, s. 8.
Proceedings on making of prohibition order
(2) After subsection (1) has been complied with in relation to an offender who is bound by an order referred to in that subsection, the offender shall endorse the order, acknowledging receipt of a copy thereof and that the order has been explained to him.
Validity of order not affected
(3) The failure of an offender to endorse an order pursuant to subsection (2) does not affect the validity of the order.
(4) In the absence of evidence to the contrary, where it is proved that a disqualification referred to in paragraph 259(5)(b) has been imposed on a person and that notice of the disqualification has been mailed by registered or certified mail to that person, that person shall, after five days following the mailing of the notice, be deemed to have received the notice and to have knowledge of the disqualification, of the date of its commencement and of its duration.
Certificate admissible in evidence
(5) In proceedings under section 259, a certificate setting out with reasonable particularity that a person is disqualified from
(6) Subsection (5) does not apply in any proceedings unless at least seven days notice in writing is given to the accused that it is intended to tender the certificate in evidence.
Definition of registrar of motor vehicles
(7) In subsection (5), registrar of motor vehicles includes the deputy of that registrar and any other person or body, by whatever name or title designated, that from time to time performs the duties of superintending the registration of motor vehicles in the province.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 260; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36, c. 1 (4th Supp.), s. 18(F); 2006, c. 14, s. 4.
Appeals to Supreme Court of Canada
(1.1) In the case of an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, the direction referred to in subsection (1) may be made only by a judge of the court being appealed from and not by a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada.
(2) If conditions are imposed under a direction made under subsection (1) or (1.1) that a prohibition order be stayed, the direction shall not operate to decrease the period of prohibition provided in the order.
R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 261; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 36, c. 1 (4th Supp.), s. 18(F); 1994, c. 44, ss. 15, 103; 1995, c. 22, s. 10; 1997, c. 18, ss. 12, 141; 2006, c. 14, s. 5; 2008, c. 6, s. 27.
