CASE LAW ADDENDUM - R v Scherbey

On September 9, 2015 Edward Scherbey was driving a vehicle exiting a school zone. His speed was measured using laser at 56 km/h. Constable Sabulsky stopped him and issued a traffic ticket for speeding in the school zone. He disputed the ticket but was not successful.

Mr. Scherbey appealed his conviction and was successful. An issue with the testing of the laser was raised in the initial trial and not explained by the JJP in deciding on her conviction. A new trial was ordered.

Of interest here is a side issue. Mr. Scherbey suffers from health issues and was ordered by his doctor to avoid stress. He arranged for Mr. J. Maddock to act as his agent for the appeal. Mr. Maddock is not a lawyer, but does have a law degree. In the eyes of the court he does not have right of audience unless the court chooses to grant it.

In an addendum, Mr. Justice Cullen explains the law around having an agent represent you at a summary conviction proceeding and why he chose to allow Mr. Maddock to do so.

Reference Links:

• Read the Reasons for Judgment - R v Scherbey
• Addendum to Reasons for Judgment - R v Scherbey