Case Law

We often see serious collisions reported in the news where the offending driver was only issued a traffic ticket for the violation that caused it. Public sentiment often conveys the wish that the driver should have been charged criminally for what they have done. One yardstick for considering a criminal charge instead of a traffic ticket is whether the offending driver showed "a marked departure from the standard of care which a reasonable person would have exercised in the same circumstances."

In this article Paul describes a David vs Goliath case where Frank Kristen disagreed with the ICBC claims adjuster finding him 100% at fault for a collision. Mr. Kristen proceeded to a Claims Assessment Review where the adjudicator agreed with the claims adjuster. The final step was to have the issue heard before the court and the case against ICBC was commenced.

Judicial Justice Burgess examines the definition of "use" as it applies to the use of electronic devices while driving.

Not all collision litigation resulting from crashes on our highways involve motor vehicles. In this case, the collision occurred between Rosario Perilli, a jogger, and Wendy Marlow, a 10 year old youth riding a bicycle. Mr. Perilli fell to the ground in his attempt to avoid the collision and suffered injuries, including one to his shoulder that required surgery to repair.

This is a case that dates back to November 1, 1962 in the British Columbia Supreme Court. It is the origin of what is known among police officers as the Schryvers Test and is used to assist in properly identifying the driver in traffic court as the accused.

Douglas Heuring was riding his bicycle eastbound on 13 street approaching Grand Boulevard East in North Vancouver, B.C. He stopped for the stop sign about 10 feet back from the marked stop line at the intersection.

Jewel Taylor was issued a 3 count violation ticket in North Vancouver and in February of 2016 paid the fines shown on the ticket. She subsequently received a bill from ICBC for the point penalties involved totalling $640. Shortly after that she applied for an extension of time to appeal her conviction. She was 18 months late in doing so according to the Criminal Rules of the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

In the case of R v Griffith we find ourselves in the Supreme Court at an appeal of a conviction for speeding. Edward Scherbey was driving out of a 30 km/h school zone travelling at 54 km/h. Constable Sabulsky made both a visual estimate of his vehicle's speed and measured it with a Stalker Dual DSR radar device before issuing the speeding ticket. At the conclusion of the trial in Provincial Court, a conviction was entered.

This case involves Doctor Benham Beheshti who was a physician at a hospital in Port Moody and lived in Vancouver. On August 30, 2015 he was on call and summoned to the hospital to treat a seriously ill patient. He was stopped for speeding on Pender Street and issued a traffic ticket by a member of the Vancouver Police Department.