CASE LAW - R v Schultz
- Read more about CASE LAW - R v Schultz
- 4 comments
- Log in to post comments
Driving related decisions by the courts.
The case of R v Tannhauser involves the use of a cell phone app that prevents making a cellular phone call while driving. Initially Mr. Tannhauser's defence was successful after receiving a distracted driving ticket but it did not survive after examination in the BC Court of Appeal.
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.
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.