My client was charged with Public mischief. The allegations were that he reported his number plate stolen to divert suspicion from himself. The police alleged that my client had fled the police and did not want to be charged hence he reported the plate stolen. The Crown had video evidence of the biker fleeing the police. 30 minutes after the traffic stop, the police arrived at my client’s house as he was the registered owner of the number plate that was on a bike that had fled that night. The Crown asserted that they have a strong case and that my client must plead guilty and take their resolution position. I advised my client to go to trial and his charges were stayed on the day of the trial as I pointed out the weaknesses in the Crown’s case. 

Our client was issued a Notice of Administrative Penalty “NAP” for operating the vehicle while their ability to do so was impaired by alcohol. 

Upon being retained, we reviewed the evidence provided by the police officer as well as the physical paperwork provided to our client. We noticed that there were various issues in the police investigation. We made several arguments including the argument related to the lack of the relevant video disclosure. The police had disclosed In-car Digital Videos, however, no videos from the detachment were disclosed. The CCTV videos from the detachment were relevant as a substantial portion of the investigation occurred at the detachment. Just before the IRS hearing, the law was amended making the lack of video disclosure a non-issue. We argued that our client is entitled to the benefit of the law that was in effect on the day the penalty was issued. Further, we argued the overarching principle of procedural fairness. The adjudicator decided in our favour and our client’s penalty was cancelled. 

Successful Result: IRS Fail Cancelled, No Suspension. 

IRS Fail Cancelled 

Our client was stopped for speeding. The police issued them a Notice of Administrative Penalty “NAP” for operating a motor vehicle while their blood alcohol concentration was equal to or over 80 mg% within 2 hours of operation and impaired operation.  

Upon being retained, we reviewed the evidence provided by the police officer as well as the physical paperwork provided to our client. We presented our client’s side of the story for his erratic driving which was due to a mechanical failure in his car. Further, we argued no written notice of the roadside appeal was provided to him. Although, the officer did make some verbal assertions, however, those alone were not sufficient to meet the legislative onus. Our client provided honest and cogent evidence and asserted that the NAP was given to him at the conclusion of the investigation. Our client was able to provide a lot of details that were missing from the primary investigating officer’s narrative. Due to these details, the Adjudicator decided to believe our client. The adjudicator decided in our client’s favour and their penalty was cancelled. 

Successful Result: IRS FAIL Cancelled, No Suspension. 

Our client was issued a Notice of Administrative Penalty “NAP” for operating the vehicle while their ability to do so was impaired by alcohol. 

Upon being retained, we reviewed the evidence provided by the police officer as well as the physical paperwork provided to our client. We noticed that there were various issues in the police investigation. We made several arguments including the argument related to the lack of video disclosure. Just before the IRS hearing, the law was amended making the lack of video disclosure a non-issue. We argued that our client is entitled to the benefit of the law that was in effect on the day of the issuance of the Penalty. Further, we argued the overarching principle of procedural fairness. The adjudicator decided in our favour and our client’s penalty was cancelled. 

Successful Result: IRS Fail Cancelled, No Suspension. 

Domestic Assault with a Weapon Charge Withdrawn 

Our client and his wife were returning home when they began arguing. The argument escalated and ended with the wife alleging that our client hit her with a heavy tool case several times on her head. The complainant visited the hospital and got herself checked for a concussion. She reported the incident five days after the occurrence.  

Upon being retained, we ordered disclosure and familiarized ourselves with the circumstances of the incident and our client’s relationship with his partner. Our client maintained innocence. We set the matter for trial. The charges were serious. The Crown also sent us medical records, however, no notice was given about their intention to produce them at the trial. On the trial day, the complainant showed up and we advised the court that the defence is ready to proceed. The complainant became anxious and reluctant to testify. After a brief backroom chat, the Crown decided to call no evidence and withdrew the charges against our client. 

Successful Result: Charge Withdrawn; No Criminal Record