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

The reasons for judgment of Mr. Justice Sigurdson (in chambers) continues from the case where he found that British Columbia's Immediate Roadside Prohibition (IRP) where a driver provided a fail breath sample was contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms because it did not provide for sufficient grounds for review of a prohibition. In this case, Mr. Justice Sigurdson decides that penalties issued under the old IRP scheme will stand as his declaration of invalidity is not retroactive.

Links:

Sivia v Superintendent of Motor Vehicles (original case)

Reasons for Judgment - Sivia v British Columbia (Superintendent of Motor Vehicles)