Quote:
Originally Posted by Bent Wookie
You missed THE most important part of that ruling...
|
Your quote was from the portion of the headnote derived from the decision of Dickson C.J. and Wilson, La Forest and Sopinka JJ. Those were the four Justices who combined to write for the four member MINORITY decision. Ladouceur was a controversial decision decided by a 5-4 majority. It was from the majority decision that I took my excerpts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bent Wookie
The other sections you quoted (one from Ontario and the Traffic Safety Act from Alberta) are not in context as they are directed solely at stopping for an officer to address an infraction or something related.
|
Both the majority and the minority were of the opinion that an aribitrary detention occurred in violation of s. 9 of the Charter. The majority felt, however, that the Ontario legislation was saved by s. 1. The minority disagreed on this point.
There was more to the song and dance under the Ontario act than I quoted. Under that legislation, drivers are obligated to have a valid license and to have it with them. Similar requirements are imposed upon drivers in Alberta under our Traffic Safety Act. In my opinion, the sections I quoted from the Ontario act are analogous to the sections I quoted from the Alberta act. Traffic safety legislation is pretty uniform across the country in this respect in large part because of decision like Ladouceur.
If you're referring to the driver in this thread who got a ticket for his expired insurance card, then yah, the sections I quoted don't have much to do with that. They do, however, speak directly to an officer's power to stop you as you're driving along minding your own business.